Deletion of Logos of Viacom

Comment: Absolutely no evidence of |notability. Absolutely no |independent sources showing that this topic has been covered by independent, reliable publications. Unless |reliable sources are produced indicating the logos themselves are notable and objects of independent study, deletion is compelled by Wikipedia policy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS||WP:RS)

Comment: per the decision on a similar article: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BBC_One_logos. The scant text that does accompany each logo does little but describe what we can see already. This appears to violate #REPOSITORY, which requires that the text provide an encyclopedic context
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Article fails #DIRECTORY
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: |Original research and pointless |cruft. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a gallery of corporate logos, let alone a publisher of |OR analyses of such logos.  Viacom is |notable, it's logos are not (unless of course someone can find multiple, independent, |reliable sources of which these images are the subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:CRUFT||WP:OR||WP:NOTE||WP:RS)