Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sofia Mel

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. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:52, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Sofia Mel

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Sofia Mel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

PROD declined. My original PROD was Enough to avoid an A7 but the claim, as noted on their own website is actually "one of the biggest and most modern mills", which doesn't appear to establish notability, and a BEFORE/check of the Bulgarian article doesn't identify independent, in depth sourcing to meet WP:ORG. Text has since been revised to say "one of the biggest bread- producing" but that's also not a clear benchmark for WP:N (also, unverified beyond their own site). StarM 13:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. StarM 13:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. StarM 13:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. StarM 13:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

• Delete There are no secondary sources supporting the article at all. It is high time we made being sourced only to the subject's website a prodably deletion guideline that can only be turned down if someone adds at least one source that is not the organizations website.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:33, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
  • There are secondary sources out there: [1] [2]. – Uanfala (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Powerful Karma (talk) 07:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
• Delete No significant news coverage.Lesliechin1 (talk) 08:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. This should never have been deprodded. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:57, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

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.