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.
G11 Unambiguous advertising or promotion
Creditor8989 (
talk) 09:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - Relies primarily on primary sources (no pun intended). This might also violate
WP:NOTABILITY. The Ninja5 Empire (
Talk) 09:10, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. Mindless nomination by an obviously incompetent editor. Definitely not G11 material. Not all of the links posted by Dan arndt are credible or significant enough to establish notability (like the blog post by the founder himself), but some of them (
[11],
[12],
[13]) are. Edit: Just a quick Google search will reveal many others, like
[14],
[15],
[16],
[17] etc. I think the nominator should either withdraw their nomination, or this AfD should be speedily closed, as it is nonsensical (and looking at the
nominator's talk page and COI concerns, it could have been made in bad faith, possibly as an attempt to harm their competition or something).—
J. M. (
talk) 12:50, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - A glance at the Google indicates that this is a notable brand. See Dan A's sources above.
Carrite (
talk) 13:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - One of the world's most famous brands of tea, and the biggest seller in some countries, 6th largest in the world. No idea why anyone would nominate this for AFD. Probably a demonic coffee drinker.
Deathlibrarian (
talk) 11:11, 13 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep Notability can be established by reliable sources which have covered the subject, and a lot more skimming the topic under discussion. --QEDK (
愛 •
海) 14:10, 18 October 2017 (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.
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.
G11 Unambiguous advertising or promotion
Creditor8989 (
talk) 09:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - Relies primarily on primary sources (no pun intended). This might also violate
WP:NOTABILITY. The Ninja5 Empire (
Talk) 09:10, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. Mindless nomination by an obviously incompetent editor. Definitely not G11 material. Not all of the links posted by Dan arndt are credible or significant enough to establish notability (like the blog post by the founder himself), but some of them (
[11],
[12],
[13]) are. Edit: Just a quick Google search will reveal many others, like
[14],
[15],
[16],
[17] etc. I think the nominator should either withdraw their nomination, or this AfD should be speedily closed, as it is nonsensical (and looking at the
nominator's talk page and COI concerns, it could have been made in bad faith, possibly as an attempt to harm their competition or something).—
J. M. (
talk) 12:50, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - A glance at the Google indicates that this is a notable brand. See Dan A's sources above.
Carrite (
talk) 13:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - One of the world's most famous brands of tea, and the biggest seller in some countries, 6th largest in the world. No idea why anyone would nominate this for AFD. Probably a demonic coffee drinker.
Deathlibrarian (
talk) 11:11, 13 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep Notability can be established by reliable sources which have covered the subject, and a lot more skimming the topic under discussion. --QEDK (
愛 •
海) 14:10, 18 October 2017 (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.