Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HelloFresh

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HelloFresh

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

Is the firm notable? Or merely advertisory? See Talk:HelloFresh. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The nomination does not provide any reasons for deletion and is therefore technically invalid. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 17:12, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
HighKing I believe the "reasons for deletion" are in the form of questions. The post also invite us to look at the talk page of the article for further insight. ----Steve Quinn (talk) 02:01, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Recently returned from the PROD graveyard, the references all fail the criteria for establishing notability as they fail WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. References should not be be almost entirely based on PRIMARY sources such as company announcements, interviews, press releases, funding announcements etc. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 17:12, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article is based on notices of funding, and the unreliable Huffington Post. That's not substantial sourcing. DGG ( talk ) 01:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable company that fails WP:CORPDEPTH.--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:58, 17 September 2017 (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.