Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florist Exchange

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 17:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Florist Exchange[edit]

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

Apparently non-notable web directory. No sources in article, nothing obviously found by googling. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 15:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - AfD should not have a fallacy reason. If you do not establish a rational reason, this AfD is going to be closed. WP:GOOGLEHITS Eduemoni ^↑talk↓ 16:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, although I'd note that the page that you have linked to is merely an essay and not a policy document. Nevertheless, if you wish to you may strike the line about googling and replace it with the following, quoted directly from that essay as an example of a good argument to use: "No reliable sources found to verify notability". The fact is that the article contains no reliable sources to establish notability - indeed, no sources at all. The only external links in the article are to the subject's own websites. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 17:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Although there are some Google News hits, none of them seem to be about this British organization. A normal Google search doesn't throw up any reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and no evidence that it meets WP:CORP. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:58, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- Looks NN to me. It may be an attempt to create a rival for Interflora. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:35, 11 February 2013 (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.