Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vuly Trampolines

Vuly Trampolines

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

Not notable enough for Wikipedia. Many of the listed sources are either primary or parochial, the article has a blatantly promotional tone, and the accounts that have significantly contributed to it are pretty much only here for that purpose. Graham87 00:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Promotional? Absolutely! COI? More than likely based on the SPAs involved! We can also add WP:NPOV based on the potential COI writing in a promotional tone. However, I do feel that there are enough WP:RS to establish WP:GNG. [1], [2], and [3] to start with. I would say the best thing to do is strip this down to the basic facts as stated in the references. Everything else belongs in their brochure in Toys R Us. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 01:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per FoolMeOnce2Times. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 21:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]