Deletion of Pizza Haven (Australia)

Comment: Saying things like "there's loads of sources" and "sources are available over there" is |useless and futile, especially when it has already been said sources all appear to be based on interviews or company announcements (which fail ORGIND). Volume of sources is not part of the critiera, but quality of sources. Please link to specific sources and we can then look to see if this topic is notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:GHITS)

Comment: I cannot find a single reference that meets the criteria for establishing notability. Most are company announcements or based on company announcements. A notable topic should have references that are intellectually independent as per . Perhaps some of the Keep !voters above can link to a couple of references that believe establish notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORGIND)

Comment: It always seems to me that defunct companies are more appropriate for recording in an encyclopedia than extant ones and the rationale for the revamped Wikipedia:Notability (companies) does not apply because there is no need "to prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals". That it was separately taken over in two countries makes merging the article problematic and incorporating it into a list just makes things more directory-like. No, it meets  and is OK as it is
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)