Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asbuilt

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 of the debate was delete. Titoxd^(?!?) 01:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Asbuilt

Appears to be spam for linked company. Artw 23:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unencyclopedic, poorly written, only thing worth saving is the dictionary definition or some merged into Construction but not worth it since it would be a total rewrite of maybe one sentence. I agree it is also thinly veiled spam.--Nick Y. 00:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Advertisement. Spelling of title also goes straight to company websites (of various ilks) on Google, so it can't help but look like spamming. Tychocat 01:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete not an ad, exactly, but it certainly doesn't belong here. --djrobgordon 04:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. DarthVader 07:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as As-built into the article on Blueprint without the spam references. Mr Snrub 16:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. However, "as-built documentation" seems to be a big thing in the construction industry and worthy an article in itself, perhaps some of this article could be re-written, re-named and without the spam. --Richhoncho 18:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Hard to add anything to the above.--Runcorn 19:41, 4 July 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.