Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solid Gold (pet food)


 * 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. Salvio giuliano 18:32, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Solid Gold (pet food)

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

Not notable Chidgk1 (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)


 *  Delete or Redirect to Pet food maybe? No indication of notability, it's just a brand of pet food with typical mentions in industry publications. Valereee (talk) 19:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This should be either kept or deleted, not redirected. Inclusion at Pet food would be totally WP:UNDUE, and would be to promote this brand over all others that are not mentioned there. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Does redirecting require coverage? I feel like in the case of commercial brands we could simply redirect without needing to even...well, mention? I dunno, willing to hear reasons or policy against. Valereee (talk) 18:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * See WP:RASTONISH. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is PR copy on top of PR copy on top of PR copy. Not an original word to be found.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 21:45, 18 March 2023 (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.