Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BodyGuardz

:{{la|BodyGuardz}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BodyGuardz Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|BodyGuardz}})

Sources used appear to be mostly primary or of very low quality. Company only has 39 employees and does not appear to have any particular claim to notability. CorporateM (Talk) 14:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

:Delete. Not a single one of the sources is reliable by the consensus definition of the word. May merit an article someday, but not today. —Swpb^talk 15:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• Delete: promotional text just gilding a not-as-yet sufficiently notable enterprise (WP:NBUSINESS). Quis separabit? 15:06, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable; it does read like promo text. Kierzek (talk) 15:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Metamagician3000 (talk) 05:05, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• Delete per above - Nothing more than promotional. –Davey2010 • (talk) 06:06, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

:Delete Promotional and fails WP:ORG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:14, 25 November 2014 (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.