- 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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 02:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Eight Sleep (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Clearly a soft "infomercial" on WP that is not notable. Normchou 💬 20:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and New York. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Sources 7 and 12 are product reviews, that don't appear to be paid promotional items. Why PC Mag is reviewing a bedding system is beyond me, but they're both RS per Source Highlighter, so are fine. I think we can establish notability with these and the other sources given. Oaktree b (talk) 20:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- The topic is the company - the product reviews don't provide any in-depth "Independent Content" about the company. I'd also add that both those websites earn commissions from clicking on links, so not as independent as you might think at first, the websites are motivated to promote both the reviews and the click-thru traffic. HighKing++ 11:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Needs a bit of cleanup but I think the product is notable enough. Pablo (talk) 12:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability of the *company*. If someone believes the product is notable and wants to write an article about the product is is likely going to be under a different named article. HighKing++ 11:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Which sources help establish WP:NCORP?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- I should probably start that topic at RSN I keep on not getting around to, but at present, I am still disinclined to accept affiliate marketing as satisfying ORGIND, and would therefore also recommend against an article on any of the products of this company, not having found any references meeting the criteria for those. Similarly, I could not find any qualifying coverage for the company itself, so I will have to go with delete. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- 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.