Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HGC Apparel


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 11:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

HGC Apparel

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Promo piece on a non-notable business. Sources cited are passing (or no) mentions and churnalism, and a search finds nothing better; none of this comes even close to meeting WP:GNG, let alone WP:ORGCRIT. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:43, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion, Business, Companies,  and United States of America. DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:43, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * delete preferably G11 and G5 - this is a paid for vanity spam article, see . PICKLEDICAE🥒 13:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is nothing in this article that satisfies general notability or corporate notability, because none of the coverage is independent secondary significant coverage. This article is also entirely the work of blocked paid editors and their sockpuppets.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - Request to closer: Please do not close as G11.  The disadvantage to G11 is that it doesn't support a subsequent G4.  The spammer can keep submitting the same spam until the title gets locked.  Please let this AFD run for 7 days. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I reckon this is a G5, rather. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment to User:DoubleGrazing - The spammer hadn't been blocked when they wrote most of this.  G5 might involve time travel, and that has too many paradoxes.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:12, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No, they were a sock of an already blocked user, therefor G5 absolutely applies. PICKLEDICAE🥒 18:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I love the predestination paradox. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:ARTSPAM. Fails WP:GNG. Honestly, not saying it is, but if this is the product of WP:UPE, someone is owed a refund.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It is a product of UPE and arbcom/cus have already been provided with the receipts. PICKLEDICAE🥒 18:32, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It looks it. Why people take money to do something they do this badly is beyond me. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:07, 5 September 2022 (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.