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. Already deleted via speedy deletion CSD G11. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HomeSun Ltd (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Besides the fact that the whole article is written in (often borderline impenetrable) ad-copy prose, there are no references whatsoever attesting to the notability of the company (all the mentions in newspapers appear to be tangential), and searching for its name on Google News, Google Books, etc., yields no usable results. I don't think you can argue that the company has any sort of inherent notability and it generally fails WP:CORP pretty soundly. MasqueDesRonces (talk) 06:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 08:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per MasqueDesRonces, also, the article also conflicts with what Wikipedia is not, especially regarding advertising and promotion. HenryTemplo (talk) 13:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per rationale at WP:SERIESA. FalconK (talk) 08:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per G11. Kill it with TNT. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:03, 2 June 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.