Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foodjunky.com
Appearance
- 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:20, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Foodjunky.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Typical startup spam . nothing significant about it. Reads like press or company profile. Speedy Delete material. There is no significance for being a part of encyclopedia. Funding news and advertising about themselves. Light2021 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Sources fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Nothing notable in WP:RS. shoy (reactions) 14:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:52, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per good nomination Legacypac (talk) 13:47, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete sources are not significant enough, neither can I find outside sources. jcc (tea and biscuits) 16:47, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Corporate spam. Carrite (talk) 21:51, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
- 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.