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. SarahStierch (talk) 05:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sweat365[edit]

Sweat365 (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)

There seems to be only one independent reliable source per WP:GNG: namely, the Seattle P-I article in the references. I've looked and can't find anything else. GNG requires multiple independent reliable sources. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: fails WP:NWEB. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I found a couple passing mentions and press releases, but no other significant coverage beyond the Seattle P-I profile. Subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:WEB.  Gongshow ^Talk 16:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A non-notable corporation. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as not meeting the correspondent notability guidelines. — ΛΧΣ21™ 02:24, 16 August 2012 (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.