Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luckies

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 00:20, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Luckies[edit]

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

The article makes some big claims, but a search for reliable coverage comes up empty. I found one site that a first glance appears to be significant coverage, but it turns out to be a blog. And it's just one site: the rest I could find were sites selling their products, or press releases. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a blog! It's a legitimate manufacturer that was established in 2005, they invented the first foil covered scratch off map!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.245.103 (talk) 14:32, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is their listing on the nation limited database; http://companycheck.co.uk/company/05388393/LUCKIES-OF-LONDON-LIMITED - They supply Waterstones, John Lewis, Amazon and many other large corporations proving they are a legitimate company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.245.103 (talk) 14:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-sourced orphan blurb about a non-notable manufacturer. applying the foil scratch-off printing process long used on lottery tickets to a non-lottery use (tourist maps) hardly seems newsworthy.Cramyourspam (talk) 13:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete reliable sources are necessary to support the article Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2014 (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.