Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College Hunks Hauling Junk

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 keep. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

College Hunks Hauling Junk

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

promotional page for borderline-notable company. The references are press releases, except for the WSJ, and that one article on the firm as a human interest story is not enough to sustain notability. The awards as a trivial as imaginable " Top 50 Franchisee Satisfaction Award"; and the ones for "fastest growing"mean nothing--the term is an euphemism for "not yet knowable . The promotional nature of the article is shown by the coverage of the non-notable founders trivial appearances on TV shows. Of course, there isn;t much else to say. DGG ( talk ) 05:36, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:11, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep per very substantial coverage in reliable independent sources and cleanup any promotional issues. The company and its founders have also been featured Shark Tank, Millionaire Matchmaker, The Pitch here, an MTV show and House Hunters. In addition to what's already in the article, coverage includes Time magazineand Inc here. Plenty of additional sources per Google. Candleabracadabra (talk) 14:52, 8 May 2014 (UTC) Struck per WP:EVADE. See User talk:Candleabracadabra. Ivanvector (talk) 00:11, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr^\ talk / 03:00, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete.~~ Speedy Delete The article seems to be solely for advertising. WP:ADVERT. --Mr. Guye (talk) 03:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (sadly). I agree with Mr. Guye (talk · contribs) that this sure looks like advertising, and the article itself is a total disaster that needs something between cleaning up and blowing up. But, I can't escape the fact that, ignoring all else, the Time and Wall Street Journal articles are, by themselves, sufficient to meet WP:GNG (he says, while holding his nose, shading his eyes, and looking around furtively to see if any of his fellow deletionists have spotted him). -- RoySmith (talk) 00:36, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] (short article). That said, this article needs copy editing to address promotional tone. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:13, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 16:56, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - sufficient coverage per the above sources to meet WP:GNG and WP:COMPANY. Gongshow talk 18:09, 28 May 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.