Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dodikbobik/Logobee

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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  delete.  Mini  apolis  03:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

User:Dodikbobik/Logobee


Nine year old userspace draft moved here after Articles for deletion/LogoBee with only more press releases added. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:21, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unlikely notable and apparently also no longer necessary. SwisterTwister   talk  20:00, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. I think the page must go live. Your criteria for nominating a company page is outdated. There are numerous useful and worthy companies whose contributions to the world has been noted, but not published by a "giant" publication. Logobee exists since 2000, won some awards and was running several nonprofit makeovers. Logobee published multiple tutorials, and spreading free graphics material during its operation. I see several companies listed in WIKIPEDIA in the same caliber with the only difference that they received a large sum of money and got published by a "BIG" "REPUTABLE" publisher. Dodikbobik  talk  11:34, 23 December 2015 (EST)
 * Delete, as it is now, it wouldn't be suitable for article space, and it's just sitting collecting dust. Enough time has been given to work the draft, and it still hasn't produced a suitable article. --kelapstick(bainuu) 23:00, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment if someone is debating this further, note that the article was not edited since February 2014 which was the last time this editor was active until this was put up for deletion. It's being kept just as a WP:WEBHOST violation with no effort to actually get it published as an article. It's been a problematic promotional article since 2006 with zero effort to get actual reliable sources and instead complaining that WP:CORP is "outdated" because it won't just allow spammy press releases as sources. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mainspace article was deleted multiple times as unambiguous advertising, and this draft remains just that. Cites are one useless marketing "award", press releases and other primary sourcing. WP:NOTPROMO, WP:NOTADVERTISING. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 17:54, 28 December 2015 (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.