Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GetLunchin

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. Davewild (talk) 14:47, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GetLunchin

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

Website with questionable notability that comes across as a ad also. Wgolf (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing like an advt, just info - don’t delete - The references are all different and they have been mentioned multiple times by very well known and respected publications. I have also seen their Twitter handle, they have a lot of celebrities endorsing them for the quality of their food as well as celebrities such as Manoj Bajpai Kunal Vijaykar Sanjay Gupta (director) Karan Patel following them. BuzzingaWiki talk BuzzingaWiki (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning more towards delete for now - At first look, the article appears to have several refs but my searches found a lot of these same ones so it seems the website hasn't received that much attention and there's not much information so it may be too soon. SwisterTwister talk 06:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Only finding one source that provides significant coverage. Does not meet WP:N. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:54, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – highly promotional without notability.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:07, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Sources don't establish subject as notable. CookieMonster755 (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2015 (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.