Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PPcorn

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 01:35, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PPcorn

PPcorn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails

• Delete as searches found nothing better. SwisterTwister talk 04:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:15, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Just more PR blurb. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]

• The above rationale is ambiguous, and also does not address the rationale presented in the deletion nomination. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Insufficient coverage found to establish notability. --Michig (talk) 07:51, 15 May 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.