Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bonkum

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. - Mailer Diablo 13:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bonkum

Bonkum (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

User says he wants to "Trying to craft this into an article about unique furniture that can be used for health and sexual enhancement." Keep or Delete? No vote. -WarthogDemon 05:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete as advertising for a company, product, group or service that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopaedia article. Created by a single purpose account named for the product. The references citied are just pages on the company's website. -- IslaySolomon | talk 06:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete. Advertising spam. --Charlene 06:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Kind of stinks of advertising. -- Tim D 06:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep seems to be mentioned in the press quite a few times. [1] Kavadi carrier 06:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The product sounds interesting but the article is unencyclopedic advertising spam.--Dakota 06:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Could be notable if the article weren't a sales brochure, and if health-enhancing fisting swings are an idea whose time has come, or whatever. Auto movil 06:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I have rewritten the article to mention only details of the item which are described in magazine reviews. Kavadi carrier 06:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as spam, since Bonkum (talk · contribs) created the article. So tagged. If not, then regular delete - the reviewer magazines aren't notable with 231 and 48 ghits for the two googleable magazines. This is despite the <euphemism>search engine optimisation</euphemism> the porn industry does. MER-C 09:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete t his is clearly spam TheRanger 19:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• What is spam? ATA_Airlines, Boeing, or Sears show me the difference? Both these examples and the Bonkum page seem to be talking about the products, the history, and the company. 'Spam' is a relative term. Much the like the term 'Pornography'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boudle (talk • contribs)

From WP:CSD: Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company, product, group or service as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion: an article that is blatant advertising should have inappropriate content as well. MER-C 04:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete — per WP:SPAM Martinp23 20:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I am surprised that it has not been speedy deleted; it is clearly spam.--Runcorn 09:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The article is bunkum.--Taxwoman 12:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. --Easyas12c 14:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete-- This article doesn't really mean anything to me- I like police stuff, but they shouldn't go advertising: This's Wikipedia, not ADdiepedia (my ahem, "non-existant version" of ADs) My userpage Chicochango 22:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• weak delete - i wanted to assume good faith, detailed encyclopaedic knowledge on notable aspects of BDSM is reasonable. However, after looking over this user's true contribution history, and after noting the fact they have changed their name to try and disassociate themselves from what they are doing, I have to say that this should be deleted, and all edits made by this IP need to be reverted. -Zappernapper 18:37, 8 November 2006 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.