Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NaturoPack

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:18, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NaturoPack

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

Non-notable organization without any cited or existing reliable sources to generate a quality article. Delta13C (talk) 06:41, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Despite some passing 2007-8 local coverage in Now Magazine (such as [1]) and a couple of passing Google Books mentions, one of which is more about materials than this campaign, I am not seeing evidence that it achieved notability in and beyond its time. AllyD (talk) 07:07, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. The link to the website does not work. They may be closed. QuackGuru (talk) 07:15, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All the sources I could find and the ones already in the article are either unreliable or not independent. Blogs are not WP:RS, and this organization appears to fail WP:GNG. Omni Flames (talk) 08:51, 26 July 2016 (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.