Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed's Amazing Liquid Light

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ed's Amazing Liquid Light[edit]

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

Unreferenced page, with no notability (at least not when searching on the internet). Also, the page has been written by a user who possibly has a COI - with the page reading as quite promotional. My opinion is that the subject is not notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Seagull123 Φ 18:14, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 14:19, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 14:19, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable without some reliable sources and with article author that has a COI. —Prhart com♥ 14:20, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as simply too soon, nothing currently convincing for solid notability yet. SwisterTwister talk 05:14, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I only found primary sources, so no notability here. In veritas (talk) 00:30, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It seems like an open-and-shut case. Where is the notability? CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:14, 16 May 2016 (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.