Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FreeLife

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 no consensus. WPASR j⚛e decker ^talk 03:33, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FreeLife

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

Article is heavily reliant on Earl Mindell press. Other press seems to be marketing or quick mentions DerbieRover (talk) 22:55, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. My opinion is that it's important to provide the facts about an existing company and its products, however dubious both are, and to maintain an unbiased article about Freelife on Wikipedia. We can't delete an article because we don't like the company or feel its products are a scam. To me, the matter of Mindell's outing as a fraud has occurred publicly and is stated clearly. Apparently -- at least from current company press -- he has not been associated with the company for several years. I've participated in the editing of this article for > 5 years, and don't perceive now there is blatant marketing or misstated, undemonstrated health effects, as there once was. --Zefr (talk) 23:32, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article relies on material that is obviously Multi level marketing propaganda. Thye have no real press since Mindell and that was almost ten years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santafesoul (talk • contribs) 00:40, 3 December 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, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:11, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's sufficient coverage to warrant an article. Notability is not temporary, so a lack of ongoing coverage is immaterial. TheBlueCanoe 21:35, 7 December 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, Michig (talk) 08:32, 12 December 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.