Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tangle Teezer

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 keep. Nakon 20:32, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tangle Teezer

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

To my recollection this is indistinguishable from the version previously deleted as G11 spam. Author ~~appears to be~~ is a sock-puppet trying to avoid association with the previous efforts. Bazj (talk) 10:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updated, sockpuppetry confirmed. Bazj (talk) 15:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Kyle1278 (talk) 10:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Kyle1278 (talk) 10:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Reliable sourcing to meet GNG. Company has been recognised with several awards. Clearly notable topic. AusLondonder (talk) 10:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Bazj (talk) 11:41, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are multiple independent sources that provide coverage of the company (1 2 and 3 after just a quick search). Meets WP:GNG. If these is a problem with promotional tone in the article, it should be fixed, not deleted. No longer a penguin (talk) 12:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep is notable, covered by decent sources. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at best and Draft if willing as the current sourcing overall is still questionable, not solid enough. SwisterTwister talk 07:30, 6 May 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.