Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LogPoint

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:22, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LogPoint[edit]

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

Article by paid editor; small company with no significant accomplishments -- refs though real are clearly PR DGG ( talk ) 02:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete refs are real, but not significant. New Media Theorist (talk) 02:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Purely promotional and obviously a case of someone 'mistakenly' believing that Wikipedia is another LinkedIn, not understanding the difference between an Encyclopedia and a comercial networking site or the Yellow Pages.. Whether it is part of the Orangemoody paid spamming campaign or not, DGG has said all that needs to be said already. Wikipedia cannot be allowed to be used for profit in this way at the abuse of the voluntary unpaid time that dedicated users spend building this encyclopedia which in spite of some biographies and articles about some companies, was never intended to be an additional business networking platform. Whether the text itself sounds promotional or not, the article is an advert and a plethora of sources has never been an automatic assumption of notability.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines and WP:NCORP. If we can establish a consensus through AfD that non-notable and promotional articles will be speedily deleted it can only help the project. per WP:IAR Jbh ^Talk 18:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete promotional article by a paid advocate, making it effectively, advertising, Richard Harvey (talk) 15:10, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Kudpung. BMK (talk) 23:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:53, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:53, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:53, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now until better coverage is available as although my searches found results here and here, there could be better. SwisterTwister talk 05:41, 16 September 2015 (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.