Talk:Turtle pie

Notability and references

I added the notability tag because the current references do not establish the subject's notability. The references appear to include a blog and some sales sites for the product, but no sort of independent, in-depth coverage in reliable sources. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:43, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- rvd temporarily to give creator time to improve refs Atlantic306 (talk) 13:32, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Atlantic306: The whole reason I tagged it for notability rather than nominated for some form of deletion was to give the contributor (or anyone else) a chance to improve references. Removing the tag implies that you have reason to think the subject is notable, ideally because you know of some source that can used to establish it. I'm not going to put it back on, since I don't want a dispute with you, but in my opinion you're doing it wrong. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:16, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate websites are to show they sell them.

Don't get to worried about the company websites I put on here, all they show is that they sell them. --Wyatt850 (talk) 16:07, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed those references according to

WP:ELNO. We do not cite web pages whose primary purpose is to sell a product. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:26, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply

]