Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bascol

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. Not vandalism, but pure spam. Could have been speedied as G11. Randykitty (talk) 15:11, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bascol[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pure vandalism! No sources to indicate this company meets the notability requirements Please check talk page Farooqahmadbhat (talk) 16:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:44, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:45, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not pure vandalism. But still, no sources that meet WP:NOTABILITY. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: It is a pure vandalism and maybe promotional plus Conflict of interest i believe! I think the page creator is the owner of "Bascol"... Please have a look at page history Farooqahmadbhat (talk) 05:01, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you and I have different definitions of vandalism: "any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism", and I assume good faith on the part of this editor. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The user created page without including a single source.. Does it still make the sense of good faith edits? Well, I call this pure vandalism and promotional page. Farooqahmadbhat (talk) 17:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please *sigh* people (not regular editors) create pages all the time lacking any sources. It just happens. This is the first version after a series of edits by the creator, and this was the creators second or third article created. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:43, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete purely promotional article, absolutely not written from a neutral point of view, no independent sources. There really isn't anything to save here. It's not serving our readers and would need to be rewritten from scratch. --Slashme (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2018 (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.