Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PrettyLitter

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 19:23, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PrettyLitter

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

This is a procedural nomination. The article was created by a UPE sock but can't be speedy deleted per G5. I'd like the community to evaluate if the article is sufficiently notable to keep. Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One of the references from luckypuppymag.com appears to meet the criteria for establishing notabilty but I cannot find a second. The other references fail for a variety of reasons but mostly because they rely on company-produced material WP:ORGIND. If a second reference is found, I'm happy to change my !vote. For now, topic fails GNG. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:11, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not sure if the article is primarily about the company or the product, but I don't see evidence either is notable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:20, 4 January 2018 (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.