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. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:04, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TaoTronics[edit]

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

The subject doesn't appear to be notable. Sources are product reviews at best and do not cover the subject in any detail. For example, none of the "History" section's sources mention the history at all. The article also blatantly misrepresents its subject; according to the sources it's a brand, not a company in its own right. Huon (talk) 22:27, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 22:38, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 22:38, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Brand exists, not notable. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller! (distænt write) 22:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An article setting out the brand's wares, supported by product notices, one of which concedes the brand is not well-known. In the absence of evidence of the brand's encyclopaedic notability, the coverage at Sunvalley Group is sufficient. AllyD (talk) 14:37, 28 January 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.