Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lifestyle Fragrance

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. RL0919 (talk) 03:45, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lifestyle Fragrance

[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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMEDIA. Non-notable magazine.

The author moved the article directly to mainspace (rev) after it was declined by AfC reviewers twice (here and here) Bishal Shrestha (talk) 02:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 02:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 02:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Another discussion for page created by the founder of same organisation(ref) going on here. Bishal Shrestha (talk) 02:54, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG, with no significant coverage online in WP:RS. Tracy Von Doom (talk) 09:50, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - lacks the coverage in in-depth, independent sources needed to meet WP:NCORP; too many of the sources cited in the article are routine business annoucements/press, which NCORP does not consider to establish notability. Sources would be needed to show how the magazine itself has a claim to encyclopedic notability when separated from other, more notable topics it is connected to/has covered.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:55, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Primary sources or sources that don't show depth needed for an article like this to stay so thus delete. IlluminatingTrooper (talk) 02:32, 22 September 2019 (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.