Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specto Design

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. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Specto Design

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

Winning non-notable awards does not merit notability. Natefitz93 (talk) 13:09, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: An article authored by blocked WP:SPA account User:Spectodesign; more recently the Prod was contested by WP:SPA account User:Spectodesign2. The only coverage I am locating is a short piece in Health & Medicine Week ([1], via Highbeam, subscription reqd.) publicising their creation of a website. Neither this nor the industry awards indicated in the article provide sufficient evidence of notability for the firm. AllyD (talk) 11:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per WP:COMPANY. I found no independent published works regarding this company, its significance, or the unsourced rewards that this article claims that they have. Northamerica1000 has also mentioned concerns regarding the user who created this article. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:12, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: pure promotional text. I also adopt AllyD's cogent arguments. Quis separabit? 01:18, 21 November 2014 (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.