Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 September 20: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:08, 25 September 2006

< September 19	September 21 >

Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 September)

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 Please notify the administrator who performed the action that you wish to be reviewed by leaving {{subst:DRVNote|page name}} on their talk page.
 -->
-==== [[Enigma software group]] ====
-:AFD: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enigma software group]]
-'''Relist'''
-Our article [[Enigma software group]] was deleted, at the time it was deleted there was new information presented, that was not reviewed or commented on.  Thie new information was:
-. an edit of the article reducing it to a stub in order to comply with [[WP:NPOV]] <br>
-. Two more links added to news stories which broght the total number of verifiable links to third party non trivial news stories about the company to 6.  This should satisfy point 1. of [[WP:CORP]]
-These are the links:
-[http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles/2005/s1603/10s03/10s03.asp]
-[http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:JIhEsENj3cgJ:redherring.com/Article.aspx%3Fa%3D11282%26hed%3DIE7%2Bdue%2Bthis%2Bsummer+redherring+%22enigma+software%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6] the last link is in google cache. You need to login to Red Herring's website read it directly.
-Also:<br>
-Some of the editors had complained the article was not written from a neutral point of view  [[WP:NPOV]].  I rewrote the article as a stub which should comply with that policy as well.
-Thanks!
-(DISCLOSURE: the wikipedian who is asking to relist does has a vested interest in the article) [[User:Enigmasoftwaregroup|Enigmasoftwaregroup]] 16:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse very well reasoned closure''' Those two extra links are passing mentions. We're scraping for scraps here. ~ [[User:Trialsanderrors|trialsanderrors]] 17:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse Deletion''' The intent of [[WP:CORP]] is to document (NOT advertise) genuinely notable companies about whom readers would be likely to seek information. Wikilawyering ("we've got six articles instead of four") doesn't make this a notable company, and the intent of the article, even when stubbified, is clearly self-promotion, not information. If this were a genuinely notable company, an uninvolved party would write an article about them, and they wouldn't need to be writing about themselves. [[User:Fan-1967|Fan-1967]] 19:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''', valid closure (very well reasoned), also looking at the content, the article did not make any compelling case or offer evidence of meeting the guideline at [[WP:CORP]], and the vanity element undoubtedly does not help, but the company is not listed on any major stock exchange, let alone being used to calculate an index.  <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> 22:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''', valid AfD with excellent closure comments. --[[User:Deathphoenix|Deathphoenix]] [[User_talk:Deathphoenix|'''ʕ''']] 14:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Overturn''' so that the most recent version of the article can be evaluated against [[WP:CORP]]. If the company has been the subject of significant multiple independent coverage, its article should probably be kept. --[[User:TruthbringerToronto|TruthbringerToronto]] ([[User_talk:TruthbringerToronto|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/TruthbringerToronto|contribs)]] 17:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
-**The previous AFD found the four presented links at that time to be insufficient. You can read the two new ones cited above. Neither qualifies as non-trivial. [[User:Fan-1967|Fan-1967]] 23:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
-* '''Endorse closure''' (keep deleted).  The most recent version of the deleted article reveals that this company reports 7 employees and $22 million in revenues.  None of the articles or links cited qualify as independent non-trivial coverage.  For the same reason that you shouldn't attempt to write an [[WP:AUTO|autobiography]], you shouldn't attempt to write or even significantly edit an article about a company where you have a strong vested interest.  If/when you do become a truly notable company, let someone else write the article.  [[User:Rossami|Rossami]] <small>[[User talk:Rossami|(talk)]]</small> 02:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
-* '''Endorse deletion''', anything else would open a can of worms for Wikipedia to become an advertisment. <font face="sans-serif">'''[[User:Daniel.Bryant|Daniel]][[Special:Random|.]][[User talk:Daniel.Bryant|Bryant]]'''</font> 06:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)