Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Who What Wear

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 14:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who What Wear[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)

Fails WP:NCORP. Refs are routine business news and PR. scope_creep^Talk 15:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California. Shellwood (talk) 16:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:NCORP, there is insufficient WP:CORPDEPTH with WP:ORGIND. The article is supported by trivial coverage of a product or a product line launch [1] (with substantial reliance on quotes from co-founders Power and Kerr and Target's senior vice president), an acquisition [2] (with substantial reliance on quotes from the company acquiring Who What Wear and co-founder Kerr; churnalism of a press release [3]), inclusion in lists of similar organizations ("most innovative", per FastCompany), an interview with the founders [4], a promotional blurb related to a book written by the co-founders [5], a post by a WP:FORBESCON, an announcement of participation in [an] industry event that substantially relies on quotes from a co-founder [6], and an article built around an interview with co-founder Power, e.g. "Here's her playbook", "Power says", "Power believes", "she says", "Power has found", "Power says", "Power credits", "Power says", "she says". An online search finds more trivial coverage and overt press releases. Beccaynr (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per the analysis above by Beccaynr which shows the sources rely entirely on promotional information provided by the company, failing ORGIND. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:29, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even the RS references appear to be PR churnalism. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:03, 30 November 2022 (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.