Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hifigear

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. ✗plicit 23:48, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hifigear

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Citations brutally fail WP:CORPDEPTH/WP:RS, and the article overall fails WP:NCORP as a result. It's a mix of user-generated, primary, and hyper-local sources. Nothing that meets CORPDEPTH was located on a search. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A shop founded in 2003, with one location and a website. Nothing in the article or elsewhere to suggest it could possibly meet WP:NCORP. Edwardx (talk) 11:22, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:53, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable enough to pass WP:NCORP. Suonii180 (talk) 21:50, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, doesn't pass WP:NCORP Masterhatch (talk) 10:17, 19 September 2021 (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.