Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waterlogic


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:12, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Waterlogic

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

promotional article by undeclared paid editor. Notability is irrelevant.  DGG ( talk ) 16:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as obvious spam excluded by Wikipedia by WP:NOTSPAM. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:13, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:23, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:23, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NCORP .Clearly promotional.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:47, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree it fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NOTSPAM and WP:NCORP. There is a paucity of sources other than press releases and passing mentions to be found by running the usual gSearches. Geoff &#124; Who, me? 20:57, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Removed some obvious advertising and PR, and now what's left is routine business transactions. This doesn't merit a Wikipedia article, per nominator, regardless of remaining sources. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:04, 10 November 2017 (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.