Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bigtank Productions
- 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. Cirt (talk) 07:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Bigtank Productions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
My rationale for this nomination is, if you take away all the spam element of this article, you will be left with nothing to write in this article, plus fails WP:VERIFY and WP:NOTABILITY Donnie Park (talk) 12:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this company. Joe Chill (talk) 01:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Joe Chill (talk) 01:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 13:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination; no historical information or other indicia of significance here, only a laudatory self-description and a list of clients or products. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.