Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windmill Organics

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.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Windmill Organics[edit]

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

non notable company. almost all the refs are just official listings. DGG ( talk ) 00:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - neither assertion nor evidence of notability by any standard, however loose. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:00, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:00, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article itself is describing the firm's existence rather than asserting notability. My searches are finding little, beyond a small quantity of passing coverage of a product recall. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 06:44, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable local business whose notability is neither established elsewhere independent of the area which its located nor able to be cited to enough sources other than primary sources. Notability for inclusion within Wikipedia is nowhere to be established here, to that extent, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of every single local business in any given local area. —Mythdon 07:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's not just a local retailer - they have 5 brands: Biofair, Amisa, Biona, Raw Health and Profusion. They look as if they ought to be notable ... but I've sadly not found any RS yet. I'm sure there must be something out there. PamD 10:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your additions. Doesn't the Soil Association's award make it more notable?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Have to have sources before we have article; can't put the cart before the horse. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The only other sources I've found are this and this. I'm forced to conclude the organisation is not notable. Adam9007 (talk) 18:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- like other editors, I was not able to find much in a way of independent sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.