1211:- There is essentially nothing else to actually say different about this company if not only that the article currently still only focuses with funding and other trivial activities, the fact that it I ly existed a mere few years shows that it could still in that be advertising especially if the people involved want to advertise what the had and in the likely hopes someone else would reinitiate their funding. Still, a mere few articles about how it ended still shows the fact there would be no actual substance for a convincing article. With this said and the fact shoeing there is still such trivial information starting about funding and its other business activities show there is nothing else actually significant to say about this company. All of my analysis shows clearly above the concerns involving this. Considering how staunchly persistent advertising campaigns are here at Knowledge (XXG), we must not be coaxed unto convincing something that is still advertising what the comoany was about, regardless of what the company's fate was because, we have in fact still advertising articles that contained items such as lawsuits and other unpuffery, but those were still shown to be advertising, simply in a crafted sense and attempting to be surreptitious about these intents. Once we become a PR web host about any companies, regardless of their status, we are not the encyclopedia once conceived.
1278:- The concerns listed here have been clear and exact, including in showing where the concerns are, so they ultimately still cannot be considered "independent", "reliable and "significant". Once again as always, there has been established consensus at AfD that the concerns of Indian news media containing pay-for "news" is a serious concern, and therefore extreme caution is needed for any of these companies, especially because there have notoriously serious cases. Another serious concern, and it continues, certainly not helping if we continue accepting such blatant advertisements, are the excuses and defenses are used of "Hey, if you're hosting that advertised article with only its PR and republished PR, my article can be published too, let me simply submit it myself and accept, instead of actually listening to concerns", is something that we can actually halt, if we take responsibility and remove such advertisements.
440:
this is about encyclopedia not dumping your grand mistakes to build personal portfolio for the future funding. Knowledge (XXG) gives the highest edge for such companies building highest degree of credibility/ notability online which they are definitely not. Even its just a paragraph to write about else
Getting funding from A - B- C -D? is there anything else to write about this startup? what they really achieved so far being creation of encyclopedia material. This is not some profile to write when someone gives you money in a huge amount so you can become encyclopedic significant. Let them become significant first to write about here. Whats the hurry? Search and this startup is definitely not ended but building new ones using this failure as a milestones. This is promotional after even being dead. Reason for the AfD
1463:
you be more specific about the "Third
Largest UK or US store" you are refereeing to (as per imagination)? This is neutral encyclopedia, not geography specific. On the other hand the claim made by company is highly questionable. Fake claims with no clear research is not something Knowledge (XXG) is a part of. Can you give the research apart from company given data to media. I could not found any substantial data for the claim that it was Third Largest how? in terms of funding it got? Probably yes! or number of people they recruited. Probably yes! and ultimately they have to lay off people and even shut down this division from the company? Probably yes! how is it " Third Largest" ? If you can provide data to prove apart from company imaginations or merely proposition, I would love to understand more.
1388:- There are no assertions because I have visibly and noticeably listed everything of concern above, exactly what is unacceptable and exactly what is PR, nothing can be said otherwise of what the company's plans are and of the specifics that were added to them, this is something that only the company cares about, and it considerably show through their repeated attempts at passing "news" when it's in fact simply their own company-supplied information. As consensus has established at AfD, and I'll state again, merely the news source being known is not a basis of accepting an advertisement, especially if the contents are themselves only for PR and advertising uses. There are never any benefits from keeping an article as it simply damns the foundation and environment of Knowledge (XXG).
515:, it is not the same thing to simply state "Satisfies GNG" without, both times note, not actually acknowledging and considering the analysis shown and what it actually emphasizes, which of course are the concerns. Therefore, if the analyses have clearly shown there is in fact nothing for WP:GNG, especially because of the large and acceptable PR intents and environment, there is then no acceptable article. Once we start blatantly compromising to keep articles because of whatever is listed or whatever seems to be suggesting "news", is when we become a PR webhost.
324:, so I'm not sure it's accurate to refer to the article as the company's "Knowledge (XXG) advertisement" or to say "they" were scraping the bottom of the barrel as I, a major contributor to the article in its current form, am entirely unaffiliated with this defunct compny 2) I'm not sure if it's possible for the article to be advertising anything at all since the company no longer exists 3) The article is four paragraphs, and one of the four paragraphs is (partially) about funding. The others are about its history, business model, and demise.
485:. what about "Depth of coverage" by Knowledge (XXG) guidelines. Even we consider all these sources and we Try making an article for Knowledge (XXG) with these references. Something hopefully will come up? Operations of highly funded startup who failed miserably in doing business? is this all about it? It can not be more than a paragraph. Knowledge (XXG) is not a Newspaper like any other influeenced media by such insignificant Startups who just got funded by investors. You are saying with the logic of
196:
by media as well as significance in itself. Definitely getting funded by VC, and building
Wikiepdia page for their publicity, releasing artciles on major media as paid. Covered once in a while. or covered mostly by Startup blogs not the notable media. If seen then left only 1 paragraph to say. Just because they belong to elite group of funded startup does not mean they are Encyclopedia notable. Definitely the article is written by close associate or company itself.
1065:
arguments putting policies and guidelines. Anyone can see what's really written on this article. I would love to improve that article instead writing here, if only there is anything to write about. Just can not write same as written in covered news (Blatant promotions and press). It is not just
Knowledge (XXG). Wish they would have significant enough. They are not! however putting the points of giving guidelines. Knowledge (XXG) is not News or PR host or
825:. See source examples below. Also, the article does not have a promotional tone. The article does not extol the benefits of the company, use peacock language, or encourage readers to do business with the company. Rather, it provides an overview about the company based upon what reliable sources state. Also, it's rather difficult to do business with a company that is no longer in business anyway, but again, the content is not promotional at this time.
1632:- Those comments meant nothing regarding notability and were certainly not convincing since they merely stated they had added sources or "attempted my best to add them", none of that affects an AfD, and in fact, it may actually benefit the AfD because no one ever actually cared to substantially improve the article. The only closest one to being acceptable of the contests was the last one which at least stated they were "third-party sources".
1702:: It definitely meets the CORPDEPTH. People seem to tag each and every sources PR like it is a new-trend in company related deletion discussions. Seems like a phobia to me, an entity is shut-down but still paying agencies to force staff-editors to write articles about them in which they compare them with others who comparatively are more successful in the business and are still running (like
1069:. I am really Sorry, but not convincing me. If the community have their verdict, I am just a part of it. Let it be. I will accept whatever they decide collectively. Will keep improving what it really stands for. Probably they would in future with their Logistic division, they should deserve their place here. Right now it really insignificant.
1482:
also, the claims that simply because the company's name is mentioned in the mere header is not a basis alone that it must be significantly about them, because the comments above show the concerns, and they show that simply stating "it's a news source" is not meaning the same thing if the contents themselves are unacceptable and unconvincing.
1867:. Its notable for one event only: its rapid rise and fall. Knowledge (XXG) is not a financial newspaper and India is so vast most people have probably never heard of PepperTap. It's time we tightened our stance against these corporate listings because that's all we seem to be doing these days at NPPand AfD.
458:"A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources". Also whether a company should or should not have a Knowledge (XXG) article has nothing to do with how big or small a company is.
1910:
outside the press releases and information on the closure of this briefly lived company, there isn't much left. Keep arguments seems to be successfully rebutted, or confusing in tone like
Ottawahitech's. I agree with Kudpung we need to do something with all these articles on recently formed companies
1759:
was very quick on deleting
Delhivery, Where discussion was not required. On the same ground or logic, Peppertap is in high competition with Delhivery. And not enough generating profit or funding as Delhivery probably had till date. These both companies are nominated as AfD by me only. One got deleted
1462:
Size of the company or numbers of the customers any company serve to, popularity, press release or being funded by notable investors is not the criteria for encyclopedia material here. Discussion based on that US and UK have their pages so Indian should also have, does not make sense here. Though can
641:
I searched the mystry of the claim "being The India's Third
Largest Grocery Delivery service". Quartz article start with the sentese. and Link is mention in the articles that links to this: YourStory article (Which Knowledge (XXG) does not allow as a reference, its just a blog written by these people
276:
as advertising alone, the information is advertising what this company is about and then what the services are, every single listed source is also advertising the company with several methods such as showing what their finance and company achievements have been or are going to be, interviews, listing
195:
Non-notable company. Nothing significant but another startup company. For being in
Knowledge (XXG) need to be much more significant than this. Else Knowledge (XXG) will become a Startup directory. 1000s of startups happens every day. Just another one. Notability required repeated significant coverage
1122:
WP:NOEFFORT was stated in response to "There is not even a article to read except a paragraph" above. That's all; no ill intent here whatsoever. However, I apologize if anyone was offended. My comment consisted of three words that created a neutral phrase, in both meaning and intent. I will leave it
1064:
What check out? I know what that is? Have you seen AfD selections. Do you really think I am not aware of
Wikiepedia guidelines and just spending my time to improving it by spending so much time. These organizations or people are making this Encyclopedia what it never meant to be, can not justify the
1888:
If you take away the routine coverage about opening and closing, there is literally nothing else left. Every single of the 6 sources above talk about the closure of the company. I don't see any non-routine significant coverage beyond this. We do not need to keep article like these - about a company
1682:
Covered by major media or citations only does not amount to its credibility. Companies makes press releases or script is given to media to write about their daily operations, their failure or being funded by various notable. Knowledge (XXG) will become directory for such companies. "What" (depth of
730:
be convincing, there are clear advertising intents here, thus that takes importance, regardless of any potential signs of notability, because once we allow any such advertisements, regardless of whether the company is currently still existing or not, is when we become damned as a neutral and ad-💕.
1845:
The whole article is based on misleading information that this company is defunct. First, this is not a company, its a brand name of a
Logistic company which is not " DEFUNCT". It is active. Nuvoex Logistics Pvt. Ltd. They even updated information on article, which is partially given as fact. They
1570:
The newspapers relied on for sources are notroius for their unreliability, and will essentially reprint any press release they are given. The article was written for the prupsoes of promotion; while thereis no longer anything to promote, there's also no reliableevidence for notability now or ever.
1481:
The fact is the contents themselves, however, if the contents themselves were PR sources, then we are certainly not going to accept them; this could also be the case with a UK or US company, since we have the same levels of attention to anything that is PR, hence making it unacceptable regardless;
711:
IBT and VCCircle? Seriously? They can write about the people or anything for that matter,and have you really seen who writes articles on such blogs, they are not even a Recognized Indian Journalistic platform or certified News agencies. Once in a life coverage on HT, not for its significance, what
439:
Knowledge (XXG) is not a space of dumping high failure with grand funding and bragged about the startups you have started. grand failure written like a saga (does not mean written so much). Leave something worth to be here, than such promotions (it is enough to have Knowledge (XXG) page itself).
1731:
On "the article does not have a promotional tone" . Apart from that, what is actually to write about that statup? Got highly funded and got closed its opearations. The end of article? How is that even significant by any logic. If you even collectively go through all the press and media. There is
472:
Significant how? blatant advertising and PR articles written all over the popular media? Yes I searched and read carefully the intend and how it has been written, clearly written like script given to media. Definitely influenced by company if not paid. That is significant for you? How easily you
1433:
significant about that? its like saying by some startup who launched just after Whatsapp or innovative like startup that We are the second most important company. That is exactly how this " Third Largest" has been covered by media. Complete influenced by company itself. No news makes such news.
1447:
Well, some of the newspapers aren't so obscure that they don't have their own Knowledge (XXG) articles. Also, the fact that the company name is in the title of the story indicates they are not being mentioned in passing. Thats what I meant. Other reasons i voted keep are phrases such as "third
1432:
can you state the sources you have really been through? have you really read the content of those articles? merely press coverage or Saga of future plans and Grand failure story. From the very niche segment of category becoming Third Largest "Online Grocery" store. Not even a store. What is so
1367:
above (particularly "pay-for "news"") implies that PepperTap compensated the respective news sources to publish the articles I provided atop in my !vote. Thus far, no proof backing this assertion has been presented, other statements of "there are no assertions" and "that is not the assertion".
277:
the names of clients, investors or other people and companies; none of it comes close at all for becoming both substantial and non-PR. There's nothing to suggest actual hopes of meaningful improvements therefore, if this only serves as advertising, we delete it lest we become a PR webhost.
1766:, but for Peppertap there are comments coming for its credibility. As Peppertap is still active with its Logistic division that is directly competing with Delhivery. I understand you are not related or working or anyones interest. But curious for different stand for both the entities.
1175:
As I see from my opinion alone, you have not expanded or added any significant information to this company, instead you have merely made a separate block with headings nothing but from that one paragraph. Still there is nothing to write but one paragraph about this company.
787:– I'm not saying that this is good or bad, but this trimming removed many sources from the article. They may be routine coverage, or maybe not, but it is still worth mentioning here, while the topic's notability is being discussed. Here's the diffs:
1448:
largest grocery store in India". Imagine the third largest grocery store in the Uk or USA being deleted. No? Then it shouldn't be deleted from India either, especially considering India has a much higher population than both countries.
1548:
to interpret our RS rules such that things that are clearly barely-processed press releases would be treated as A+ first-class carefully-verified information you can absolutely rely upon, that does not mean that doing so is somehow a
1318:
of these article, in which links are only present for these articles themselves, as opposed to press releases, which typically have the same article hosted on many various websites. As such, the sources I have provided
164:
1031:"company that is no longer in business anyway, but again, the content is not promotional at this time". It is wrong that this company has ended operations. This company is active with Logistic services.
481:: Are any of these articles tells what so exceptional about this startup to be here? Laying off huge numbers or people or getting funded by IIT people? Closing of business operations? You mentioned
341:. I originally speedied this as yet another semi promotional article about an unremarkable business, but I'm leaning towards the position that the collapse of the company makes it interesting...see
1728:
1032:
892:
1097:
Pointing to a section on an essay page is not belittling whatsoever, nor is it intended to be. People point out areas of the essay all the time at AfD. Please try to assume good faith.
117:
623:-- "was India's third-largest grocery delivery service" suggests notability. With the company having shut done, it's unlikely that the page would be used for promotional purposes.
585:
Thanks for the mention. Now striked. Still I don't think it should be deleted. Main reason given by the nom is the small size of the company but size of the company has no mention
303:
per above - failed startup, when half the article is funding rounds you know they were scraping the bottom of the barrel for stuff to put in their Knowledge (XXG) advertisement -
243:
1306:– Assertions of the sources I have provided as being somehow paid for by PepperTap to be published should be backed up with objective evidence for such claims, rather than
1512:- A simple Keep stating sources and "seems notable" is not carrying the same weight as then actuslly acknowledging and considering the stated analyses and concerns above.
1164:
I have expanded the article a bit, but I hesitate to spend a great deal of time on it; if the article ends up being deleted, the work to expand it is also deleted.
158:
1703:
926:
675:
391:
213:
1727:
You can find other sources as well, This company is not shut down. The PR still matters a lot for such companies. This company is active with Logistic services.
477:, and mentioned here. That does not mean every article published in daily newspaper should become Knowledge (XXG) article? Highly doubtful that you read about
994:
1819:
712:
the grand failure of such startups? is this why we are contributing to make Knowledge (XXG)? or is this really a purpose of building Knowledge (XXG) here?
1729:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/peppertap-to-shut-down-grocery-delivery-to-focus-on-its-logistics-business/articleshow/51950463.cms
1033:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/peppertap-to-shut-down-grocery-delivery-to-focus-on-its-logistics-business/articleshow/51950463.cms
642:
alone, not even a journalism) and then Guess what? Written by none other than Founder himself! Just for information and media portrait of this startups.
454:
A quick Google search indicates they are significant. According to the article it clearly says it is closed with no mention of building new ones. Quoting
1258:
source is not bylined, but is independent, reliable and provides significant coverage. Also, this company was not in business for only a few months. Per
512:
1708:
I didn't mean to hurt anyone's sentiment, it's my personal opinion addressed in general. If you are still feeling bad after reading this, I'm sorry!
859:
342:
538:
What you failed to see is, the sources present in the article and mentioned by NorthAmerica clearly indicate it's notability. It also passes
124:
1066:
846:
683:
478:
1807:
1108:
Please try to supply behavioural evidence that doesn't contradict an assumption of bad faith. I'm far from the only one noticing this -
1361:"... there has been established consensus at AfD that the concerns of Indian news media containing pay-for "news" is a serious concern"
17:
1811:
1666:"citations to third-party independent reliable sources which devoted significant coverage to PepperTap are present in the article".
1596:, in the past, two users had contested speedy deletion nominations for this article, providing their respective rationales there.
960:
679:
1544:, I have no problem calling that "promotional" and not considering it reliable sourcing to base an encyclopedia upon. While it's
394:
90:
85:
568:
1083:
Northamerica1000 has taken to snideness and belitting other editors in AFDs in the past few days, an unfortunate tack -
964:
179:
94:
1951:
40:
146:
1732:
nothing to write except 1 paragraph. Else what you have mentioned " Phobia" . I have no idea for its relevance here.
1310:
alone. Without proof, there's no qualification for the assertions, other than subjective personal opinion. These are
559:
463:
422:
77:
1835:
1660:– The comments on the talk page are conferrable as opinions regarding notability, in part where one user states,
1571:
Claims in thes newspapers for third largest without more exact information are best interpreted as mere puffery.
1262:, it was founded in November 2013 and remained in business through at least January 2016, closing in April 2016.
1645:
1525:
1495:
1401:
1291:
1224:
744:
528:
290:
56:
1035:
On "the article does not have a promotional tone" : There is not even a article to read except a paragraph.
1822:
which lists countries with Defunct retail companies. Defunct companies are of particular interest to many.
140:
1898:
1827:
1616:
1558:
1347:
1113:
1088:
661:
576:
362:
308:
1683:
coverage) is covered by media is more important than Who (popular media or daily news paper) covered it.
818:
539:
486:
482:
474:
455:
1947:
1670:
1598:
1453:
1419:
1370:
1325:
1264:
1166:
1125:
1099:
1055:
827:
801:
771:
628:
601:
594:
555:
459:
418:
376:
348:
329:
36:
1890:
1050:
136:
863:
489:, we should make wikipedia a press release website or probably a directory for such funded startups?
1932:
1920:
1902:
1880:
1868:
1855:
1831:
1794:
1777:
1741:
1718:
1692:
1674:
1650:
1620:
1602:
1593:
1582:
1562:
1530:
1500:
1472:
1457:
1442:
1423:
1406:
1374:
1351:
1329:
1296:
1268:
1229:
1185:
1170:
1129:
1117:
1103:
1092:
1078:
1059:
1044:
831:
805:
775:
749:
721:
694:
665:
651:
632:
605:
580:
563:
533:
498:
467:
449:
426:
405:
380:
366:
352:
333:
312:
295:
265:
235:
205:
81:
59:
1851:
1792:
1773:
1737:
1716:
1688:
1633:
1513:
1483:
1468:
1438:
1389:
1279:
1212:
1181:
1074:
1040:
732:
717:
692:
647:
516:
494:
445:
403:
278:
257:
227:
201:
172:
53:
822:
371:
The Quartz article linked above by TheLongTone is already used as a citation in the article, FYI.
320:
I'm ambivalent about keeping or deleting this article, but I wanted to point out that 1) I almost
1307:
896:
186:
1259:
73:
65:
1894:
1876:
1823:
1612:
1554:
1414:, the sources I've seen go into the company in relative amount of depth, hence seems notable.
1343:
1109:
1084:
1006:
998:
972:
938:
904:
871:
657:
572:
571:
is a bad argument at AFD, and usually means the other stuff referenced needs an acerbic eye -
358:
304:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1946:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
586:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1916:
1449:
1415:
767:
624:
372:
344:
325:
860:"PepperTap's collapse shows everything that is wrong with India's young internet companies"
414:
1019:
985:
951:
930:
917:
884:
599:
Thanks for further clarifying your !vote by mentioning the sources I have provided below.
1251:
1847:
1787:
1769:
1761:
1754:
1733:
1711:
1684:
1464:
1434:
1177:
1070:
1036:
713:
687:
643:
545:
490:
441:
398:
247:
217:
197:
152:
1929:
1578:
1872:
1668:
Such commentary should naturally be taken into consideration, rather than ignored.
1247:
1243:
111:
1912:
549:
1541:
893:"Peppertap to shut down grocery delivery; to focus on its logistics business"
1314:
press releases, as evidenced in part by utilizing Google searches using the
1786:
Stay curious. Good for you. It would be nice if you be reasonable as well.
1573:
850:
1911:
and the press releases written about them. This is getting out of hand.
1889:
which existed for a couple of years and then closed. This is precisely
1240:
1871:-completely as per the nom and the other arguments that support it.
961:"India's third-largest online grocery platform PepperTap taps out"
1940:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
357:
Hmm, good find. Any more like that and I'll change my opinion -
1611:
And one of them was most likely an undisclosed paid editor. --
1239:– The sources I provided above (with one exception) are all
1664:, and more directly and particularly, another user states,
993:
Peermohamed, Patanjali Pahwa & Alnoor (23 April 2016).
766:-- I trimmed the article some, and there's not much there.
927:"PepperTap fate shows why e-tail can't live on discounts"
847:"What PepperTap's shutdown means for e-grocery business"
544:
The content present is not much different in style from
1662:"The company has been covered in several news articles"
1553:, and I really don't see that we're obliged to do so -
796:
792:
788:
670:
Well, there are many other sources that says the same,
321:
107:
103:
99:
1592:– Please take note that on the article's talk page at
995:"Hyperlocal grocery delivery app PepperTap shuts shop"
171:
726:Although stating that "third-largest grocery store
185:
1928:I agree that there isn't much here for an article.
656:Yep. There's no evidence this is actually true -
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1954:). No further edits should be made to this page.
554:I don't see a reason why it should be deleted.
1846:have closed merely grocery delivery services.
1753:I came though one interesting finding though,
244:list of Companies-related deletion discussions
1338:That is not the assertion. Please reread the
513:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Grofers
8:
1820:Category:Defunct retail companies by country
242:Note: This debate has been included in the
212:Note: This debate has been included in the
1067:Knowledge (XXG):What Knowledge (XXG) is not
479:Knowledge (XXG):What Knowledge (XXG) is not
241:
214:list of India-related deletion discussions
211:
1323:serve to qualify the topic's notability.
1250:that have been published in independent,
1806:There are only 23 companies listed in
1665:
1661:
1364:
1360:
1015:
1014:Italic or bold markup not allowed in:
1004:
981:
980:Italic or bold markup not allowed in:
970:
947:
946:Italic or bold markup not allowed in:
936:
913:
912:Italic or bold markup not allowed in:
902:
880:
879:Italic or bold markup not allowed in:
869:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1808:Category:Defunct companies of India
1540:When the RSes are clearly running
24:
1342:analyses people have provided -
750:23:33, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
695:21:55, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
666:20:04, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
652:19:27, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
633:17:20, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
589:. 10:39, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
534:23:33, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
450:19:17, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
427:17:11, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
406:16:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
381:15:06, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
367:13:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
353:12:42, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
334:22:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
313:21:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
296:21:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
266:17:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
236:17:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
206:17:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
1:
1818:subcategory. To compare see:
1933:01:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
1921:13:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
1903:08:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
1881:15:17, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
1856:05:10, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
1832:09:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
965:International Business Times
925:Sen, Sunny (24 April 2016).
680:International Business Times
60:05:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
1795:05:02, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
1778:17:28, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
1742:16:08, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
1719:15:44, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
1693:15:32, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
1675:00:19, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
1651:18:01, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1621:10:43, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
1603:10:46, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1583:04:18, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1563:09:48, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
1531:16:36, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1501:03:44, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
1473:08:13, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
1458:03:24, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
1443:17:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1424:14:54, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1407:05:11, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1375:09:35, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1352:09:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1330:04:41, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1297:04:12, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1269:03:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1230:02:52, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1186:17:33, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
1171:10:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1130:10:06, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1118:09:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1104:07:58, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1093:07:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
1079:21:52, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1060:21:35, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1045:17:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
832:02:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
806:02:22, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
776:02:11, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
722:17:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
672:third largest grocery store
606:10:16, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
581:10:05, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
564:10:03, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
499:17:51, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
468:10:25, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
1971:
1943:Please do not modify it.
1893:we can do without it. --
32:Please do not modify it.
1810:which does not have a
1276:Comment and analysis
1209:Comment and analysis
569:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
322:entirely rewrote it
1308:proof by assertion
1256:The Economic Times
897:The Economic Times
1812:Category:Defunct
1709:
1590:Comment to closer
999:Business Standard
858:Tandon, Suneera.
823:available sources
390:: Seems notable.
268:
261:
238:
231:
1962:
1945:
1790:
1764:
1757:
1714:
1707:
1673:
1648:
1643:
1601:
1528:
1523:
1498:
1493:
1404:
1399:
1373:
1365:"republished PR"
1328:
1294:
1289:
1267:
1252:reliable sources
1227:
1222:
1169:
1128:
1102:
1058:
1023:
1017:
1012:
1010:
1002:
989:
983:
978:
976:
968:
955:
949:
944:
942:
934:
921:
915:
910:
908:
900:
888:
882:
877:
875:
867:
854:
830:
821:per a review of
804:
747:
742:
690:
604:
598:
595:PratyushSinha101
531:
526:
401:
293:
288:
263:
260:
254:
251:
233:
230:
224:
221:
190:
189:
175:
127:
115:
97:
34:
1970:
1969:
1965:
1964:
1963:
1961:
1960:
1959:
1958:
1952:deletion review
1941:
1873:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
1834:{{small|please
1788:
1762:
1755:
1712:
1669:
1646:
1634:
1597:
1526:
1514:
1496:
1484:
1402:
1390:
1369:
1324:
1292:
1280:
1263:
1225:
1213:
1165:
1124:
1098:
1054:
1026:
1013:
1003:
992:
979:
969:
958:
945:
935:
931:Hindustan Times
924:
911:
901:
891:
878:
868:
857:
844:
826:
800:
745:
733:
688:
676:Hindustan Times
600:
592:
529:
517:
399:
291:
279:
258:
252:
249:
228:
222:
219:
132:
123:
88:
72:
69:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1968:
1966:
1957:
1956:
1936:
1935:
1923:
1905:
1891:WP:CORPSPAMand
1883:
1861:
1860:
1859:
1858:
1840:
1839:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1797:
1781:
1780:
1760:difinitely by
1747:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1722:
1721:
1696:
1695:
1677:
1654:
1653:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1606:
1605:
1594:Talk:PepperTap
1586:
1585:
1565:
1534:
1533:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1427:
1426:
1409:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1355:
1354:
1333:
1332:
1300:
1299:
1272:
1271:
1233:
1232:
1205:
1204:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1025:
1024:
990:
956:
922:
889:
855:
836:
835:
834:
811:
810:
809:
808:
779:
778:
759:
758:
757:
756:
755:
754:
753:
752:
724:
702:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
654:
636:
635:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
583:
546:Google Express
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
503:
502:
501:
430:
429:
408:
385:
384:
383:
369:
336:
315:
298:
270:
269:
239:
193:
192:
129:
68:
63:
54:Metropolitan90
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1967:
1955:
1953:
1949:
1944:
1938:
1937:
1934:
1931:
1927:
1924:
1922:
1918:
1914:
1909:
1906:
1904:
1900:
1896:
1892:
1887:
1884:
1882:
1878:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1863:
1862:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1821:
1817:
1815:
1809:
1805:
1802:
1801:
1796:
1793:
1791:
1785:
1784:
1783:
1782:
1779:
1775:
1771:
1767:
1765:
1758:
1752:
1749:
1748:
1743:
1739:
1735:
1730:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1720:
1717:
1715:
1705:
1701:
1698:
1697:
1694:
1690:
1686:
1681:
1678:
1676:
1672:
1671:North America
1667:
1663:
1659:
1656:
1655:
1652:
1649:
1644:
1641:
1637:
1631:
1628:
1627:
1622:
1618:
1614:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1604:
1600:
1599:North America
1595:
1591:
1588:
1587:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1575:
1569:
1566:
1564:
1560:
1556:
1552:
1547:
1543:
1539:
1536:
1535:
1532:
1529:
1524:
1521:
1517:
1511:
1508:
1507:
1502:
1499:
1494:
1491:
1487:
1480:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1440:
1436:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1425:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1410:
1408:
1405:
1400:
1397:
1393:
1387:
1384:
1383:
1376:
1372:
1371:North America
1366:
1362:
1359:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1353:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1334:
1331:
1327:
1326:North America
1322:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1302:
1301:
1298:
1295:
1290:
1287:
1283:
1277:
1274:
1273:
1270:
1266:
1265:North America
1261:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1248:staff writers
1245:
1244:news articles
1242:
1238:
1235:
1234:
1231:
1228:
1223:
1220:
1216:
1210:
1207:
1206:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1168:
1167:North America
1163:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1131:
1127:
1126:North America
1121:
1120:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1101:
1100:North America
1096:
1095:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1057:
1056:North America
1052:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1021:
1008:
1000:
996:
991:
987:
974:
966:
962:
959:R, Niranjan.
957:
953:
940:
932:
928:
923:
919:
906:
898:
894:
890:
886:
873:
865:
861:
856:
852:
848:
845:Singh, Arti.
843:
842:
841:
840:
833:
829:
828:North America
824:
820:
816:
813:
812:
807:
803:
802:North America
798:
794:
790:
786:
783:
782:
781:
780:
777:
773:
769:
765:
761:
760:
751:
748:
743:
740:
736:
729:
725:
723:
719:
715:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
704:
703:
696:
693:
691:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
668:
667:
663:
659:
655:
653:
649:
645:
640:
639:
638:
637:
634:
630:
626:
622:
619:
618:
607:
603:
602:North America
596:
591:
590:
588:
584:
582:
578:
574:
570:
567:
566:
565:
561:
557:
553:
551:
547:
541:
537:
536:
535:
532:
527:
524:
520:
514:
510:
500:
496:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
471:
470:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
452:
451:
447:
443:
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
428:
424:
420:
416:
412:
409:
407:
404:
402:
396:
392:
389:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
368:
364:
360:
356:
355:
354:
350:
346:
343:
340:
337:
335:
331:
327:
323:
319:
316:
314:
310:
306:
302:
299:
297:
294:
289:
286:
282:
275:
272:
271:
267:
264:
262:
256:
255:
245:
240:
237:
234:
232:
226:
225:
215:
210:
209:
208:
207:
203:
199:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1942:
1939:
1925:
1907:
1895:Lemongirl942
1885:
1864:
1824:Ottawahitech
1813:
1803:
1750:
1699:
1679:
1657:
1639:
1635:
1629:
1613:Lemongirl942
1589:
1572:
1567:
1555:David Gerard
1550:
1545:
1537:
1519:
1515:
1509:
1489:
1485:
1411:
1395:
1391:
1385:
1344:David Gerard
1339:
1320:
1315:
1311:
1303:
1285:
1281:
1275:
1255:
1236:
1218:
1214:
1208:
1110:David Gerard
1085:David Gerard
838:
837:
819:WP:CORPDEPTH
814:
784:
763:
738:
734:
727:
671:
658:David Gerard
620:
573:David Gerard
543:
540:WP:CORPDEPTH
522:
518:
487:WP:CORPDEPTH
483:WP:CORPDEPTH
475:WP:CORPDEPTH
456:WP:CORPDEPTH
410:
387:
359:David Gerard
338:
317:
305:David Gerard
300:
284:
280:
273:
259:
248:
229:
218:
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
120:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
1450:Pwolit iets
1416:Pwolit iets
1321:objectively
1260:the article
1246:written by
1051:WP:NOEFFORT
1016:|publisher=
982:|publisher=
948:|publisher=
914:|publisher=
881:|publisher=
768:K.e.coffman
674:. Such as,
625:K.e.coffman
550:AmazonFresh
373:Safehaven86
345:TheLongTone
326:Safehaven86
159:free images
1869:WP:NOTNEWS
1542:churnalism
1049:Check out
839:References
511:Like with
1948:talk page
1848:Light2021
1816:companies
1770:Light2021
1734:Light2021
1685:Light2021
1551:good idea
1465:Light2021
1435:Light2021
1178:Light2021
1123:at that.
1071:Light2021
1037:Light2021
714:Light2021
684:VC Circle
644:Light2021
491:Light2021
442:Light2021
413:: passes
198:Light2021
74:PepperTap
66:PepperTap
37:talk page
1950:or in a
1930:Smmurphy
1704:this one
1546:possible
1340:detailed
1007:cite web
973:cite web
939:cite web
905:cite web
872:cite web
851:VCCircle
817:– Meets
762:Leaning
556:Pratyush
460:Pratyush
419:Pratyush
318:Comment:
118:View log
39:or in a
1751:Comment
1700:Comment
1680:Comment
1658:Comment
1630:Comment
1568:Delete.
1538:Comment
1510:Comment
1386:Comment
1304:Comment
1241:bylined
1237:Comment
785:Comment
587:WP:CORP
473:misuse
165:WP refs
153:scholar
91:protect
86:history
1926:Delete
1913:Prevan
1908:Delete
1886:Delete
1865:Delete
1814:retail
1642:wister
1638:wister
1522:wister
1518:wister
1492:wister
1488:wister
1398:wister
1394:wister
1316:titles
1288:wister
1284:wister
1221:wister
1217:wister
864:Quartz
764:Delete
741:wister
737:wister
525:wister
521:wister
415:WP:GNG
301:Delete
287:wister
283:wister
274:Delete
137:Google
95:delete
57:(talk)
1579:talk
728:could
250:Human
220:Human
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
1917:talk
1899:talk
1877:talk
1852:talk
1836:ping
1828:talk
1804:Keep
1789:Anup
1774:talk
1763:Anup
1756:Anup
1738:talk
1713:Anup
1706:). (
1689:talk
1647:talk
1617:talk
1559:talk
1527:talk
1497:talk
1469:talk
1454:talk
1439:talk
1420:talk
1412:Keep
1403:talk
1363:and
1348:talk
1293:talk
1226:talk
1182:talk
1114:talk
1089:talk
1075:talk
1041:talk
1020:help
986:help
952:help
918:help
885:help
815:Keep
797:diff
793:diff
789:diff
772:talk
746:talk
718:talk
689:Anup
662:talk
648:talk
629:talk
621:Keep
577:talk
560:talk
548:and
530:talk
495:talk
464:talk
446:talk
423:talk
411:Keep
400:Anup
395:more
388:Keep
377:talk
363:talk
349:talk
339:Keep
330:talk
309:talk
292:talk
253:3015
223:3015
202:talk
173:FENS
147:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
1838:me}
1574:DGG
1312:not
187:TWL
116:– (
1919:)
1901:)
1879:)
1854:)
1830:)
1776:)
1768:]
1740:)
1710:)
1691:)
1619:)
1581:)
1561:)
1471:)
1456:)
1441:)
1422:)
1350:)
1254:.
1184:)
1116:)
1091:)
1077:)
1053:.
1043:)
1011::
1009:}}
1005:{{
997:.
977::
975:}}
971:{{
963:.
943::
941:}}
937:{{
929:.
909::
907:}}
903:{{
895:.
876::
874:}}
870:{{
862:.
849:.
799:.
795:,
791:,
774:)
720:)
686:.
682:,
678:,
664:)
650:)
631:)
579:)
562:)
542:.
497:)
466:)
448:)
425:)
417:.
397:.
393:,
379:)
365:)
351:)
332:)
311:)
246:.
216:.
204:)
167:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
52:.
1915:(
1897:(
1875:(
1850:(
1826:(
1772:(
1736:(
1687:(
1640:T
1636:S
1615:(
1577:(
1557:(
1520:T
1516:S
1490:T
1486:S
1467:(
1452:(
1437:(
1418:(
1396:T
1392:S
1346:(
1286:T
1282:S
1219:T
1215:S
1180:(
1112:(
1087:(
1073:(
1039:(
1022:)
1018:(
1001:.
988:)
984:(
967:.
954:)
950:(
933:.
920:)
916:(
899:.
887:)
883:(
866:.
853:.
770:(
739:T
735:S
716:(
660:(
646:(
627:(
597::
593:@
575:(
558:(
552:.
523:T
519:S
493:(
462:(
444:(
421:(
375:(
361:(
347:(
328:(
307:(
285:T
281:S
200:(
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
121:·
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.