- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Sacks and Co.
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sacks and Co. ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject of this article is a business with no proven notability. As written, it contains no references. A limited web search reveals no feature stories or in-depth articles that would indicate that this organization should be included in an encyclopedia. A single story in Daily Variety [ [1]] from 2006 was all I could unearth
I had previously submitted it for PROD but the reviewer somehow felt this was worth keeping. Volcom95 ( talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Volcom95 ( talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Advertising, Companies, Management, California, New York, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The Sacks and Co. article currently lacks sufficient reliable sources to establish notability, raising concerns about its verifiability and relevance. However, instead of deletion, efforts could be made to improve the article by adding credible references and enhancing its content.-- Welcome to Pandora ( talk) 08:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Article was created in 2008 by an SPI, indeed that was their only edit. Per the above, only one source could be found, so subject is not notable. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Fail WP:NCORP. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 13:30, 13 June 2024 (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.
- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Sacks and Co.
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sacks and Co. ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject of this article is a business with no proven notability. As written, it contains no references. A limited web search reveals no feature stories or in-depth articles that would indicate that this organization should be included in an encyclopedia. A single story in Daily Variety [ [1]] from 2006 was all I could unearth
I had previously submitted it for PROD but the reviewer somehow felt this was worth keeping. Volcom95 ( talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Volcom95 ( talk) 06:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Advertising, Companies, Management, California, New York, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The Sacks and Co. article currently lacks sufficient reliable sources to establish notability, raising concerns about its verifiability and relevance. However, instead of deletion, efforts could be made to improve the article by adding credible references and enhancing its content.-- Welcome to Pandora ( talk) 08:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Article was created in 2008 by an SPI, indeed that was their only edit. Per the above, only one source could be found, so subject is not notable. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 10:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Fail WP:NCORP. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 13:30, 13 June 2024 (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.