Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venia Coffee


 * 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. ✗ plicit  01:52, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Venia Coffee

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Promotional article created by SPA. No evidence of notability. WP:BEFORE shows zero RS coverage, let alone anything of WP:CORPDEPTH. Should really have been speedied when it was created. David Gerard (talk) 13:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 13:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 13:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom, totally promotional. My searches didn't find anything get it close to WP:CORPDEPTH either. Any article that contains phrases like "birthed from the third wave of coffee movement" is in trouble! Neiltonks (talk) 14:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:50, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete – there appears to be no non-trivial coverage in reliable sources whatsoever. This is wholly non-notable, in my view. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:56, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 18:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 17:04, 10 August 2021 (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.