Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biod


 * 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. no objection to recreation if sources are provided Spartaz Humbug! 20:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Biod

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable and has a small chance of being expanded. -- Σ talkcontribs 21:07, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 21 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep There are apparently independent references and much more content in the native language wikipedia. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:14, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep This article will be expanded. The Dutch version will be translated for this purpose. This article and its Dutch compeer are not created by a company for commercial purpose but by a member of a Dutch internet forum of BIOD enthusiasts.
 * Not only Biod products but also the use of polyester in bodywork construction are key areas of interest of a broad group of interested parties.


 * Hans Plantinga (talk) 14:05, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete for lack of notability per WP:RS, WP:INDY, WP:GNG. I don't see any independent, reliable, secondary sources here at all — either in this (English) article, or in the corresponding Dutch article.  I also couldn't find any such sources in a Google search.  Simply expanding the article isn't enough to establish notability; you need to show multiple reliable sources that are not connected with the subject (i.e., not from the company, and not from fans of the company, and not from people who are trying to sell the company's products).  Has this company or its stuff been discussed in newspapers, consumer reporting magazines, or anything of that sort?   Rich wales (talk · contribs) 20:21, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. What matters to me is how the article looks now, after 14 days of AfD, and it does not contain references to coverage sufficient for notability. If such exist, it would have been easy to add them by now.  Sandstein   06:24, 3 August 2011 (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.