Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prima Taste

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:14, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prima Taste[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The references listed appear to be predominately from a single source, are interviews, or don't discuss the subject in depth. I took a cursory look for more coverage, but couldn't unearth much more to satisfy WP:NCORP / WP:GNG. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 22:15, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Although not entirely relevant, the disclosed (thanks!) paid editor is a single purpose account.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:35, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:35, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:36, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 11:37, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More references have been added. currently at 20 sources and it's clear that these are multiple sources with the predominant one being The Straits Times, Singapore's main newspaper. Multiple news sources discuss the subject in depth e.g.Prima Taste’s ready-meals meant to change perceptions on convenience food. Please take a look again.--Jewellynnz (talk) 01:20, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Finding sources that meet the criteria for establishing notability is difficult for organizations/companies since most "news", while published by independent and reliable source, is not, in fact, original content as it relies on company announcements or interviews/quotations from company officers, etc. As per WP:ORGIND - 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. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the added references meet the criteria for establishing notability. Fails WP:ORGIND/WP:CORPDEPTH, topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:44, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Exemplo347 (talk) 14:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination, since subject fails WP:NCORP. -The Gnome (talk) 14:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - needs independent sources, no PR please. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 01:38, 20 August 2018 (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.