Deletion of Bafendo

Comment: nothing indicating that subject meets , and ''Fine I might as well delete it myself since you people hate us so much!'' sounds like a {{db-author}} request to me
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)

Comment: per , , ,  and #Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox| (section specific). Sorry, but this has to be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:NOTE||WP:CITE||WP:V||WP:NOT)

Comment: Fails , , no sources cited, and ventures into crystalballism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP||WP:SPAM)

Comment: Look, you. It has nothing to do with not "liking" Bafendo. You've already been pointed here, but here it is again: read . Does Bafendo meet these guidelines? Well, let's have a look. Been the subject of multiple independent non-trivial media articles? Nope. Listed on a well-known and independent ranking of important companies? Nope. Stock a component of a market index? Heck nope, I'd lay very long odds you don't even ''have'' publically-traded stock. These are the guidelines. These are the criteria. They are ''objective''. If a company meets any one of them, it is considered notable by Wikipedia standards and merits an article. If a company meets none of them, it is not considered notable by Wikipedia standards and merits deletion. That's it. If your company does in fact meet any of these criteria, please cite your sources and the article will undoubtedly be kept. If not, quit whining about it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CORP)