Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CHAK89

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 speedy delete. Per G11 by User:RHaworth SmartSE (talk) 18:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CHAK89

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

Promotional article. Fails WP:NCORP. Störm (talk) 12:44, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 12:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 12:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 12:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per G11, very few sources, and one of the mere 6 sources used is primary. Jdcomix (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Article creator was also blocked as a sockpuppet of Stoubora, who had conflict of interest warnings on his talk page, so this is also eligible for G5. Jdcomix (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jdcomix: G5 only applies when a master has been blocked prior to page creation by a sock. That wasn't the case here. IMO it should apply in cases like this, but that's another story and there have been several failed proposals to implement it. SmartSE (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2018 (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.