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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:56, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DiscountVouchers.co.uk[edit]

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

Promotional article for borderline notable firm. It may look like there are good references, but they are about the industry as a whole--and the impressive financial figure in the text is also about the industry as a whole, not this particular company. DGG ( talk ) 18:53, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional article for a non-notable company. I know it doesn't really count for anything, but there are less than 100 hits on Google. It says 600K, but if you click on page ten, it will narrow the results down to 75. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:47, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable. I would suggest merger to an article about the discount voucher trade in the UK, but I don't see a suitable target. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:45, 20 December 2013 (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.