Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bigblue Product Design


 * 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   '''Speedily gone. A7/G11, take your pick. '''. TravellingCari  02:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Bigblue Product Design

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod: notability not asserted, written promotionally, author has conflict of interest for neutrality  Maxim (talk)  15:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete—Actually, I don't think the PROD was contested. Another editor added , basically backing up the PROD, then you deleted both and applied the AfD templates.   Regardless, I think it barely fails notability for companies.  The first reference is from a trade pub and is nontrivial coverage, but the other refs are rubbish, and so the subject fails the "significant coverage" test.  Livitup (talk) 15:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Prod was contested on my talkpage.  Maxim (talk)  19:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. Which I did once.  Advertisement without notability nor reliable sources.  —EncMstr (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete: as plain WP:SPAM.   Ravenswing  16:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete lovely spam wonderful spam. JuJube (talk) 20:19, 28 July 2008 (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.