The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Uncontested, a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources means the subject does not meet
WP:GNG.
Malcolmxl5 (
talk) 04:48, 17 June 2016 (UTC)reply
The references amount only to press releases--or straightforward advertisements . No sign of any actual reliable coverage. DGG (
talk ) 20:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as it's still only 5 years old and localized so any available coverage is going to be imaginably local, nothing else convincing to suggest independent notability.
SwisterTwistertalk 21:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete did a Google search to find only sources related to the subject. There does not seem to be a lot of national exposure, or local sources even. -- LuK3(Talk) 22:05, 9 June 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails to meet requirements of
wp:gng. Search for significant coverage in reliable sources results in negative findings.
B E C K Y S A Y L E S 22:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.