Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TruEnergy


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:23, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

TruEnergy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Purely promotional article with no indication of satisfying WP:ORG. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Zackmann08, I completely understand your point of view on this matter; however, maybe I just did not include enough information or cited the wrong sources. As TruEnergy is not a publicly traded company, I didn't want to write too much thinking it would be too promotional as this is my first article. If there is any way that I can adjust it to be more in line with Wikipedia's guidelines, please let me know. I would be happy to remove or add information; however, I think removing it completely would be against Wikipedia's rules as it is notable for the following reasons... (I would like to write about a few others that have earned notoriety in the food and beverage space as I believe it is under represented compared to tech.)


 * 1. According to their website, TruEnergy has been featured in the following publications; Forbes, Fortune, Food Dive, New York Business Journal, DrinkPreneur, Yzzi Does It, Food Navigator USA, TrendHunter Lifestyle, Food Tank, The Daily Meal, Alley Watch, Boston University School of Business, FoodBev Media, Startup Convo, NY INTL, Tech Food Magazine, Treatmo. They also have podcasts with Beer League and Food-X, as well as videos with Spiritual Adrenaline and January Diaries
 * 2. They have received negative press in Medium, which argues the point that it is all promotional
 * 3. One of their advisors is Polar Beverages (one of the biggest seltzers companies in the USA) and they have a key endorser with Mike Condon of the Ottawa Senators (NHL) and have other high level professional athletes who have been pictured with the product. Their founder is also a former professional hockey player.
 * 4. They have investment from Venture Capital (SOSVentures) and angel investors (unnamed). They ran a successful crowdfunding Kickstarter campaign with backers internationally and also participated in the accelerators, Startup52 and Food-X (a global food based accelerator).
 * 5. They have key specialty sports accounts with Pure Hockey (biggest hockey retailer in the USA) and Running Specialty Group (owned by Finishline and second biggest running specialty chain). They sell on Amazon (largest internet based retailer) and have partnered with Jet.com (owned by Walmart). They sell product with Global Partners (Fortune 500 company) and A&B Vending (biggest New England vending machine company)
 * 6. They have received product reviews from Drinkpreneur (outside of the USA), and BevNet (leading beverage-oriented media company). They are claiming to create a new category of beverage entirely with the first sport shot which I think is also notable.


 * In the end, I apologize if this sounds too defensive; however, I spent a lot of time reading Wikipedia rules and other articles within the space in order to construct a good first article as I believe this company is notable and I just wanted to give my final reasons as to why. I stand by my reasoning, but do as you want. Kellyrichter (talk) 14:22, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete not yet notable per WP:CORP and WP:TOOSOON. I can only see passing mentions of them in the news, and some coverage in niche startup blogs. They might well be notable in a year, who knows. Wikishovel (talk) 14:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete At this moment, built to promote this brand and nothing else. Wikipedia is more than PR host for such brands. Light2021 (talk) 19:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as corporate spam; content belongs on the company web site not here. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:44, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as a notable company as it has notable investors, advisors, employees, and endorsers, as well as major clients, a unique product, and lots of respected press. Kellyrichter (talk) 03:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * — Note to closing admin: Kellyrichter (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
 * Also note that this user has been confirmed to have created a WP:SOCK to promote the page. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The substance of the article is promotional as to the company, its owners and its products. With sources such as "DrinkPreneur, "Kickstarter," "Foodnavigator" and its own website, the focus is on overt promotion. Even the tone of the two "Fortune" articles is more focused on the "entrepreneur-as-entrepreneur" than the organization. Geoff &#124; Who, me? 22:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as a notable company as it was also featured in Fortune Magazine this week with 799 shares. I also believe the Forbes and Fortune article are means for notability as these are major publications and not local newspapers. I agree that references like "Drinkpreneur", "Kickstarter", and "FoodNavigator" are promotional so I deleted the citations and got rid of Kickstarter in the article. Foodie99 (talk) 22:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * — Foodie99 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Striking vote of confirmed sock. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:38, 16 January 2017 (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.