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) 05:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yumbles.com[edit]

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

Website fails notability requirements laid out at WP:WEBCRIT/WP:GNG: It has not been the subject of multiple non-trivial independently published works, nor won a well-known and independent award. There are a few news story that mention the site, but only in passing when discussing a product listed there. Brianhe (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Its an online marketplace for "indie food". There is no significant coverage of this company/webpage in reliable independent sources anywhere. The few mentions of this marketplace are usually about products or traders which sell on the platform, but not about the platform itself, which is only mentioned in passing. Most of those sources are only non-reliable blogs too. There are 2 small news about this company on the Telegraph, but its only a trivial mentioning about them seeking funds. Notability is therefore not established. The article/subject fails WP:GNG and specifically WP:WEB and WP:NCORP in all points. Dead Mary (talk) 18:49, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:NOTPROMO. MSJapan (talk) 02:22, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:PROMO; strictly an advertorial page. No indications of notability or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW Delete as nothing at all comes for the substance needed for a notable article; this simply shows what there is to tell us about the company, not what substantial sources and information are convincing. There's essentially nothing else from this minimally formed article. SwisterTwister talk 06:20, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Euclidthalis/Archive - David Gerard (talk) 12:42, 29 September 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.