Nashuatec (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)

Article about a defunct brand, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria. This only claims that it was a brand formerly used by another, larger company for some of its product lines, not that it was ever a standalone company in its own right -- but there's absolutely no sourcing present here at all to suggest a reason why it would need its own standalone article as a separate topic from the parent company. And while the article has only been tagged for lacking referencing since January of this year, the article history confirms that there's never been any referencing in the article since it was created in 2005. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Europe. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. Searches reveal some images and sales sites but nothing that meets WP:GNG.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]