Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Squirrel Horn


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 18:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Squirrel Horn

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

Article asserts mild notability but completely unsourced. Ghits don't throw up any reliable sources, just on-line retailers and forum postings. Happy to withdraw if RS can be found to substantiate notability. ukexpat (talk) 14:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: article fails notability under WP:CORP and reads like WP:SPAM. Mh29255 (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep and improve. — xanderer (talk) 20:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  16:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I've found a Google news search to be a pretty good indicator of a company's notablity, and this one gets no hits.  The business appears to have been around a while, so there may be some pre-internet sources available somewhere. However, at this point there is simply no evidence of notability.-- Kubigula (talk) 04:06, 13 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.