Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ChemEqual

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ChemEqual[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to lack notability and independent reliable sources. Please see exchange on Talk:ChemEqual. Tóraí (talk) 19:09, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:31, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:31, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as spam, which was my declined rationale--I just read through it again, and there isn't a neutral, acceptable sentence in the article. Barring that, notability hasn't been established. So, delete. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't see the reliable and independent sources needed to establish notability. If kept, the ChemEqual talk page discussion points to promotional issues which also need to be addressed. EdChem (talk) 04:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - small, non-notable company/website. No reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 02:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.