Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toople.com

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. Drmies (talk) 02:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Toople.com (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)

Not notable. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:59, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The only coverage I can find seems to be PR Newswire. -- Dane2007 ^talk 18:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete- per nom. jcc (tea and biscuits) 15:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and I frankly consider this A7 material, nothing at all contains substance for establishing anything notable-insinuating. SwisterTwister talk 22:28, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- all sources are PR; this business lacks notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:32, 25 August 2016 (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.