Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blow & Drive Interlock


 * 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  18:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Blow & Drive Interlock

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Every reference is a press release or a minor notice.,  DGG ( talk ) 02:01, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, the very poor sources indicate that the company has not yet attained notability. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:53, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Disappointed that the article isn't quite as saucy as the title suggested. But seriously, this is a terribly sourced article that does not appear to pass WP:CORP. Every single reference is to a press release save one, and that one is a gossip column post about who the company's director of marketing is dating.  A  Train ''talk 10:50, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete, independent sources and citations have been added. 12:57, 8 September 2016 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2CF0:9F0:DD7B:19D2:20A7:7DB0 (talk)
 * So the "independent sources" that were added appear to be a press release posted on Equities.com, a mention of the company on a Bravo blog post because a reality star is dating the marketing director, and a Bloomberg listing showing that the company is a publicly-traded penny stock (being publicly traded is in and of itself not enough to establish encyclopedic notability). I think I'm still pretty sure we should delete this one.  A  Train ''talk 21:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.