Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yamie Chess

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. Joyous! | Talk 00:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yamie Chess

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

Proposing deletion on WP:N grounds and WP:RS grounds.

Specifically calling into question the following:

Fails WP:GNG while the company has received coverage elsewhere those sources do not appear to be independent of the subject. The reliability of other sources are also hard to verify.
Fails WP:COMPANY The Las Vegas business entity was dissolved in 2015 and there is little evidence that "there is a group of more than one person" involved.
Fails WP:SPA The creator of this article has not edited outside of it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by HiroAntagonist (talk • contribs)

Delete does not pass WP:GNG as the independence of two of the given references has been questioned (see article talk page). I did deprod this but in view of the doubtful sources have changed opinion Atlantic306 (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. For my reasons, read my full edit history of this page:)

Comment are you connected to the company as this is only your second edit, the first edit being on the article in question? Atlantic306 (talk) 21:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Atlantic306 - Hi Atlantic. I'm not connected actually but I am a Wikipedia financial donor, and have given $15 to Wikipedia in the last year. I just love made in usa companies, so much stuff is getting outsourced to china and far east its great to see folks doing it at home! I'd appreciate if people judge my neutral edits with some impartiality.Syrup41 (talk) 22:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no evidence of any notability, and if an SPA believes that notability can be bought so cheaply, there may surprises along life's fretful path. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:15, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW Delete as simply a business listing and with the apparent motivations of having that, therefore considering there's literally nothing else significant here, there's nothing to keep at all. SwisterTwister talk 05:12, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SNOW and nom. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 05:13, 23 November 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.