Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scoffable

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. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 04:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scoffable (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Promotional content has been toned down, but still not seeing how this passes WP:NCORP. Edwardx (talk) 15:08, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I don't see why this should be deleted - I have tried to refer to news and other sources where possible in describing the company. It is not intended to be promotional, only to state facts and provide background information to the company in question. I have not been asked or paid to write this entry. Also, it is not dissimilar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Eat which describes a similar company Mocathe1st (talk) 15:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.--SamHolt6 (talk) 14:48, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:09, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and close- promotional piece moved by COI, fails WP:GNG. Meeanaya (talk) 03:59, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the article cites a number of sources, but does not seem to meet WP:NCORP criteria for notability. The sources cited are heavily based on primary information (I.E are not entirely independent of the subject), are regional, are routine business announcements, or are list articles; none make a case for Scoffable being individually notable when compared to other delivery services. Couple this with the dubious means (undisclosed paid editing contradicts WP:NOTADVERTISING) by which the article was created, and this is a delete for me. SamHolt6 (talk) 14:48, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Even leaving aside the possible COI issues identified in the discussions above, my feeling is that on balance the company does not meet notability requirements at the moment. Dunarc (talk) 21:22, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:27, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Couldn't find any RS. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 03:48, 15 November 2019 (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.