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 speedy delete. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:45, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fettle[edit]

Fettle (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)

Product that doesn't pass notability. Unsourced. And I think the author is directly related with the company. Also reads like an advert. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 07:28, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. —Mikemoral♪♫ 09:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete under G11: unambiguous advertising or promotion. Advert by an editor with obvious conflict of interest. Lemnaminor (talk) 11:06, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree with speedy delete G-11 for non-notable product, article not salvageable. --Bejnar (talk) 12:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete WP:CSD#G11 - article already tagged. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 14:00, 24 September 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.