The result was delete. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I've tidied this up a bit: there were some unreliable sources (SEO/marketing blogs, mostly) which I've removed. What's left is, well, not much. This company exists currently as a holding page. It does not satisfy WP:ORG—the fact that it was founded by the winner of the latest season of The Apprentice UK doesn't count for much as notability isn't inherited.
The reliable sources that are left do not satisfy WP:GNG: the Independent article mostly consists of amusing Twitter posts about the last episode of the Apprentice. The Daily Mirror source consists purely of discussion from the television show. The Coventry Telegraph article does not provide the sort of detailed coverage needed to satisfy WP:GNG. The Telegraph.co.uk article mostly consists of quoted tweets from people live-tweeting the show and quotes from participants on the show.
The only other reliable source I've been able to find is this Daily Mail article, which is a TV review article about the final of the show.
Substantial coverage this ain't. An opinion piece in the Daily Mail and a couple of "what did viewers on Twitter say?" articles: it's hardly a case study in the Harvard Business Review. (No smoke in this case may reflect no fire: while this enterprise may represent the Apprentice winner that finally goes on to great things, most of the previous brands have disappeared without trace after the show ended.) — Tom Morris ( talk) 14:18, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Keep Had the topic been mentioned only in small/local newspapers, this article clearly would've been non-notable. But, The telegraph and independent are major newspapers with a global audience, so even the mentions should make it notable. NetworkOP ( talk) 17:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The result was delete. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I've tidied this up a bit: there were some unreliable sources (SEO/marketing blogs, mostly) which I've removed. What's left is, well, not much. This company exists currently as a holding page. It does not satisfy WP:ORG—the fact that it was founded by the winner of the latest season of The Apprentice UK doesn't count for much as notability isn't inherited.
The reliable sources that are left do not satisfy WP:GNG: the Independent article mostly consists of amusing Twitter posts about the last episode of the Apprentice. The Daily Mirror source consists purely of discussion from the television show. The Coventry Telegraph article does not provide the sort of detailed coverage needed to satisfy WP:GNG. The Telegraph.co.uk article mostly consists of quoted tweets from people live-tweeting the show and quotes from participants on the show.
The only other reliable source I've been able to find is this Daily Mail article, which is a TV review article about the final of the show.
Substantial coverage this ain't. An opinion piece in the Daily Mail and a couple of "what did viewers on Twitter say?" articles: it's hardly a case study in the Harvard Business Review. (No smoke in this case may reflect no fire: while this enterprise may represent the Apprentice winner that finally goes on to great things, most of the previous brands have disappeared without trace after the show ended.) — Tom Morris ( talk) 14:18, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Keep Had the topic been mentioned only in small/local newspapers, this article clearly would've been non-notable. But, The telegraph and independent are major newspapers with a global audience, so even the mentions should make it notable. NetworkOP ( talk) 17:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)