Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Company profiles in userspace


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the discussion was : withdrawn. Peacock (talk) 22:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Company profiles in userspace
These userpages or subpages are all company profiles for companies that may or may not be notable. Each has been created by a user who is no longer active (has not edited in months) and/or has made few (if any) other contributions to Wikipedia. While hosting a potential article in userspace while developing it for an eventual move to the mainspace is perfectly acceptable, the pages below appear to be “abandoned” and may serve no purpose for Wikipedia. In contrast, they may be considered a means of mere advertising or a way to get around WP:CORP and get Wikipedia to host company profiles that otherwise wouldn’t be acceptable. -- Peacock (talk) 16:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Stephau/updowndotcom
 * User:Terryking com/Quantumdigital
 * User:Andykatz22/WorldMate
 * User:Uncoverer/Liberty Fund
 * User:Abzug/Datatel draft
 * User:1webguy/Siteworx
 * User:Lars3loff/Day Software
 * User:FinancialAnalyst/SocialPicks
 * User:Tlillios/Speck
 * User:Mdesafey/Sequence Systems
 * User:Shilamiller/TaxBreak
 * User:Sflank/InfraTrac
 * User:Tfsummers/sandbox
 * User:Blairstephens/PlanetShoes.com
 * User:Dougmonahan/Article
 * User:Mlrebecca/New article
 * User:Pikerecords
 * User:Edswisha0758
 * User:Psh775
 * User:Roberthm
 * User:Newglobaltelecom
 * User:Upperquadrant
 * User:Gongpao/F&S International Education
 * User:Supremereality
 * User:Synapse8/PrintGlobe Inc.
 * User:Storage Geek/sandbox


 * Keep Mass deletions are not a wise course. And there is no requirement that a userpage be encyclopedic.  Any which are identifiable directly as SPAM should be identified, not just presented as a list. Collect (talk) 16:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is not a valid use of the process, as these pages are not connected by a common contributor or part of a bigger whole that should be deleted. Instead they should be considered individually. I would invite PCock to withdraw the nomination.  The few I checked had no reason to delete, resembling articles on companies under development and were not advertisement like. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:53, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll consider them individually. Peacock (talk) 22:03, 15 April 2009 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.