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. MBisanztalk 20:33, 14 August 2016 (UTC)reply
promotional article, relying on trivial local reports, and name-dropping DGG (
talk ) 20:35, 5 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete - Organisation is not notable, and article seeks only to advertise for the company. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ethanlu121 (
talk •
contribs)
Delete I found a few mentions
[1] but none of them seem to be detailed enough to truly count towards, notability.
Vanamonde (
talk) 16:58, 6 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete -- insufficient RS coverage to meet GNG.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 08:25, 7 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Weak delete - well-meaning charity, with some
news articles to its credit. Can somebody from the UK look into the new coverage? 23:06, 8 August 2016 (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.