Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fresh (company)

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 redirect‎ to LVMH. Star Mississippi 17:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh (company)

[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)

~~I didn't find reliable sources per WPNCORP. Crunchbase and moslty similar websites only. Ne (00) olli (talk) 13:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)~~ WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 14:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Fashion, and New York. Skynxnex (talk) 14:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to LVMH (its parent company) – there are a few sources on Fresh itself, but mostly passing mentions or very short pieces [1] or fluff pieces [2]. Tserton (talk) 20:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The existing article, though lacking extensive references, provides a foundational framework for future expansion. Also, while "reliable" sources might be scarce due to the company's newness, online sources like news articles, social media trends, and industry analyses demonstrate Fresh's rapid rise to prominence. Ignoring the most recent changes and additional citations, as the company matures and traditional sources emerge, the article can be enriched and substantiated, becoming a valuable resource for researchers and the general public. Deleting the Fresh page would be premature and detrimental to Wikipedia's comprehensiveness.ToranL7231 (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the company isn't exactly new, it's been around since 1991. Tserton (talk) 12:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The key part of your !vote is the admittance of "lacking extensive references" and "reliable sources". Have you read your guidelines for notability of companies? HighKing⁺⁺ 13:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The subject fairly fails to meet guidelines for organization's notability. Redirect is also a good way here. --2804:868:D051:AABE:4176:F3CE:AEFF:61A (talk) 07:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to LVMH. I am surprised by the keep claim that this enterprise has not battrached enough to establish notability because it is new; it was founded over thirty years ago.TheLongTone (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to LVMH as per ATD, there's nothing I can find that meets GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I couldn't establish that it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. In addition, their services are still very advertised. --Well I dont (talk) 11:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of signifcance and fails WP:NCORP. Redirect is possibility as well. scope_creep^Talk 15:21, 7 February 2024 (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.