Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silver Leaf Tea Company


 * 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. Shereth 18:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Silver Leaf Tea Company

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod, fails WP:CORP, no independent third party sources located indicating notability. Montco (talk) 03:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete A Google search reveals 34 hits here almost all of which are from blog sites or forums rather than reliable independent sources. Secondly, all the info for the article comes from the company's web page and blog site which suggests it lacks notability. Artene50 (talk) 04:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete even shortening the search term doesn't provide any additional evidence of notability. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 13:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * A7 Doesn't even assert notability. So tagged. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 14:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * speedy declined indicates some possible importance as large scale supplierDGG (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete due to lack of ghits, and zero gnews hits. You could substitute in the name of just about any independent US tea supplier in this article and have everything be true -- not seeing anything special about this one.-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  23:08, 19 June 2008 (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.