Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balsam Hill

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:58, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Balsam Hill[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)

Contents consists mainly of their PR and advertising, and the placement on various promotional lists--and not particularly high placements at that. This does not meet WP:NCORP DGG ( talk ) 05:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 05:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 05:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT - it's a known brand, but as the nom indicates, it badly fails WP:SIGCOV, and the formatting is so bad that any real article must be started from scratch. Bearian (talk) 22:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG, TNT also seems to be indicated here. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:14, 25 December 2020 (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.