Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Rachaelflorez/Blastoff Network




 * 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. --Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Rachaelflorez/Blastoff Network
Advertising for NN company Rd232 talk 21:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep There's a reason Template:Userspace draft exists. That said, the draft is currently promotional press release fluff - I recommend leaving the user a message about Wikipedia's inclusion criteria so they have a better idea of how to improve it. BlazerKnight (talk) 03:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it's been there a week and the user's made no edits since then. Looks abandoned to me, and it also looks irredeemably junky, for something non-notable launched the day before the page was created. It's associated with Pre-Paid Legal Services, from which I've just removed some related spam. See also User:Wikireviewer99/BlastOff Network, User:Devanhcrow1987/Blastoff Communications, User:Myblastoffnetwork (now deleted, it was a press release); Blastoff (affiliate promotion of Blastoff Network). Rd232 talk 08:23, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * We usually give people at least 6 months to a year before we declare a user space draft abandoned. That said, we don't need to keep blatant spam that long either. Gigs (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as spam that would require a fundamental rewrite to become an article. Gigs (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable company, pure spam - too much work would be needed to make this suitable for inclusion - and a search of Google News only returns 8 hits, of which 5 are identified on the Google Search Results page as press releases! The other 3 appear to be quoting directly from press releases too. Yes, leeway is given for user space, but if this company can't get significant independent coverage when they are starting off with a 'big' blitz with Pizza Hut, I don't think they are going to do much else. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 22:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - latest repeated recreation of press release fluff for a non-notable topic. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Promotional with no chance of being acceptable in mainspace.  There is one reference, but it is a press release, which is not good enough to justify an article.  With third party references, an article could be recreated, but don't start with this.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:19, 4 November 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.