Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wine n' about


 * 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 per WP:SNOW. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:03, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Wine n' about

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Clearly an advertisement. An editor disagreed with CSD, and asked for XfD instead. Cahk (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Contains legit source. --Phil Copperman (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Legit source? The only ref was the website of the subject matter. --Cahk (talk) 10:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * KEEP - Beautifully written, evidently not a WP:HOAX. Strong keep. --Hash Tag 444 (talk) 10:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Just because it's not a hoax, does not mean it's not an advertisement that should be deleted.--Cahk (talk) 18:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  11:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - This article provides no reliable sources and otherwise does not indicate WP:ORG notability.--Rpclod (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per G11. I don't like spam. Spam, spam, spam, spam ... Come back when you've gotten some media attention. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Esquivalience  t 13:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Esquivalience  t 13:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - see WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Clearly promotional too. GermanJoe (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - I recommend visits his nearest opticians as this is anything but beautifully written, As for the "Legit source" .... Well a link to there official site homepage is hardly "legit source", Clearly promotional & No evidence of notability, Fails ORG & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 18:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a place for promotion. Pishcal  — ♣ 18:58, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:CSD and a bit of WP:IAR (as a WP:ADMASQ): fails WP:WEB and WP:ORG: no reliable sourcing at all. Article, although not unambiguously promotional, was very likely created for promotion. Esquivalience t 19:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a SOAPBOX.  CookieMonster755   (talk)   19:40, 2 May 2015 (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.