Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giveaway of the Day

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:16, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Giveaway of the Day[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)

Non-notable website, fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 20:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable --Devokewater (talk) 21:06, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom as non-notable. --Lockley (talk) 00:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All sources on the page are completely unreliable. No reliable coverage found while doing a simple search. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 09:26, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. Non notable. Nika2020 (talk) 18:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: all five sources cited in the article are primary sources either owned or strongly connected to the subject. The creator did not make any effort to include at least some secondary sources but completely relied on the subject's website. Jokolis (talk) 6:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Delete The sourcing, such as it is, fails BASIC: no indication of sustained coverage in third-party, independent sources. ——Serial 16:52, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails NCORP. ——Serial 16:53, 19 July 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.