Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toner Buzz

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. Sandstein 15:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Toner Buzz

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Toner Buzz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Has not been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject lacks all criteria of WP:COMPANY. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:40, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:40, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I don't see a legitimate claim of notability in the article and a Google search turns up no reliable and verifiable sources to support such a claim. Alansohn (talk) 23:38, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete Source is BBB, seriously? Then the third one is their own website. Failed attempt at promo. — Infogapp1 (talk) 14:35, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Not notable. Looks like it was just created for Self-promotion and publicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OXYLYPSE (talk • contribs)

• Delete No apparent indications of notability, no significant independant overage is curently cited. Indeed this at least arguably qualifies for an A7 speedy deletion as no assertion of significance, as it now stands. I did not do a separate BEFORE search, relying on the nom for that. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non-notable and obviously promotional. --Lockley (talk) 05:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete saw this at NPP, would have A7'd it if it wasn't here already. No independent sources and no claim of notability. Spicy (talk) 04:13, 18 June 2020 (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.