Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Google logo

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 keep. John254 06:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Google logo

Google logo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Insignificant. The page is a result of Wikipedia bias. If there is a page for this logo, why not a page for every other company logo? Plus, hundreds of websites have a history for their logos and change it for the holidays. LightSpeed3 (talk) 17:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Interesting (I thought so) and factual - and in terms of logo notability, if Google does not cut it, who does?. I see no reason not to have the history of the logos of notable companies, if they have some history behind them. These would be best put inside the company article, if there was room. But if the company article is already large (as Google's is) then a separate page seems the logical way to go.Jellogirl (talk) 17:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep as per Jellogirl's comment. Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 17:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - I expected to find an article on it and was happy that I did. Other notable logos could have their article too, if there is enough interest in them Jagdfeld (talk) 18:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - the article is better referenced than I expected. matt91486 (talk) 18:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep/Merge I think the content is notable, and should be kept. I'm still on the fence over whether it really needs its own article, as it could probably be merged into the History of Google article. I do recognize that there appears to be a lot of google-related articles right now that could very likely be merged and consolidated, but I wouldn't recommend mere deletion as the solution here. Dr. Cash (talk) 18:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the History of Google article is already a bit large, but you can count me neutral on a merge i.e. no objection.Jellogirl (talk) 18:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep -- a subject that gets brought up again and again in logo design discussions. As for why not articles for other logos, if they can find enough reliable sources to prove notability, then sure. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep -- The logo is notable enough to merit its own article. It has been referred to numerous times in the history of web design and the future of site aesthetics. –- kungming·2 20:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep it is notable enough, and I'm surprised we don't have similar articles available, such as one about the PBS logo. RFerreira (talk) 23:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - Its notable enough. Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 00:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - Why not? I find it to be an informative and very interesting article (and what bias is there?). Besides, we could, and probably will, create articles on other logos if needed. --~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical? 00:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, but I'm biased as a contributor. FYI check out "The Evolution of Tech Companies’ Logos". Oh Snap (talk) 03:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep: Now part of popular culture. Jonathan Luckett (talk) 10:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep: Even though I am a contributor to this article, this has not influenced my decision for keeping the page. I think that instead of deletion that it should be merged with another article. Two of my preffered choices for merging are:
  Google: the logo is in reference to the identity of Google
  Logo: the image and identity of Google is known worldwide and is a perfect example of what a logo should be
  Dankeschön
  Mathieu Houz 16:15, 15 February 2008 (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.