Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aquaphor water filters

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aquaphor water filters

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable business. Sources cited are just routine business reporting, and a search finds only more of the same and the usual social media and directory listings, etc. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 21:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, and Estonia. DoubleGrazing (talk) 21:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I wrote a comment at Talk:Aquaphor water filters. The current refs are routine and fail WP:CORPDEPTH, though this slightly longer but is still press release like, chiefly quotes, and might still be trivial per CORPDEPTH. Further, a company's notability isn't inherited from reviews for its product. Per WP:PRODUCTREV: Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources, this is the case here. My WP:BEFORE search found lots of pieces on Google News, but they seem to be press releases/routine announcements or reviews about its products that also fail WP:CORPDEPTH, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Therefore, this fails WP:NCORP. VickKiang (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per VickKiang, who raised many of the same points as I would have, so there's no need to repeat those same points. I looked for additional sourcing and could find nothing of substance, and the sourcing currently in the article is insufficient. Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. - Aoidh (talk) 02:11, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, and as a run of the mill business. Bearian (talk) 02:19, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:CORPDEPTH Devoke water 20:06, 7 November 2022 (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.