Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Spraggins

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. A redirect may be created at editorial discretion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Spraggins

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

PROD removed (despite my massively detailed analysis and commentary) with the apparent basis of a few improvements but the honesty is that the article is entirely still PR and questionable for notability; as I mentioned with my analysis, there's still nothing actually convincing for his own substance. SwisterTwister talk 06:46, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect to Unmute as a valid search term, and the subject is already mentioned there. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Wikipedia needs to defend itself against being used as an advertising billboard. The sources for this article are merely advertorials of the kind that almost every middling app designer gets. Reyk _YO! 09:18, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Reyk's comment. Clearly WP:RUNOFTHEMILL and the article is obviously intended to be promotional. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 18:42, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable computer software developer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete every kid and his app does not get an article until they meet notability levels. W Nowicki (talk) 20:11, 19 September 2016 (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.