Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BEYOOONLINE.COM


 * 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   delete. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

BEYOOONLINE.COM

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional article about a reputation management company. I can't find anyone anywhere who has written about this company. The only online sources are press releases and advertising, and not many at that. It appears completely impossible to write a neutral article, based on reliable sources, as there are no such sources writing about the subject. Peripitus (Talk) 09:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: The reliable sources listed in the article are about reputation management generally, not this specific company. The only online sources I could find are, like the nominator, press releases. Lacks significant coverage for a claim of notability. Moswento talky 09:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - I was the one who previously had deleted this article as a proposed deletion, due to the same concerns raised again by the AfD nominator. The article creator later asked me to "review the article again" because they wanted it restored. Since proposed deletions can be restored on request, I restored the article. But I also warned the editor that the article was in danger of a second deletion via AfD. Those same warnings I gave the editor (promotional tone and a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources) are why I support deletion here. --  At am a  頭 15:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - As I've asked the article to be restored, I started working on the reliable sources. Unfortunately it takes time, so I won't be able to add them all that quickly. My last request is the article to be completely removed since I am not able to do so as a creator, this should be addressed to a Wikipedia administrator. Once I have all the needed sources which meet the Wikipedia Guidelines, I will publish the original and improved content, including the sources. As I am reading, the article will be automatically deleted if nobody objects within a week. - Activeormguide (talk) 07:48, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.