Deletion of Steak Escape

Comment: Meets  and  per a source review, although on a weak level, but nevertheless, meets the criteria. Below is another paywalled source
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:AUD)

Comment: Gbooks shows https://books.google.com/books?id=6rEgAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Steak+Escape%22&dq=%22Steak+Escape%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnICr2snXAhVM6SYKHaaUAMYQ6AEIUjAH this as a potential source, and we need to remember that for a company foudned in 1982 there are likely to be source materials that are not, |and never were, online. The fact that the article was proposed for speedy by one of the editors who, from my view of AfD, is one of the strongest "companies should not have pages" proponents is not something I would consider relevant to an AfD discussion on the subject (one way or another). The bottom line here is that I believe there's ''just'' enough, bearing in mind the extremely high liklihood of additional offline sources, to squeak past , and the article is not promotional in nature. TLDR: Likely GNG pass and ahe encyclopedia would not be improved by a deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM||WP:GNG)