17 June 2009

Arthur Kade (closed)

Hispanic Commonweal

Hispanic Commonweal (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

Listing one of my speedy deletions for review here, to save the new user who created the article the trouble of coming here. I deleted it as a A7 group, with a dash of G11 advertising for the first-person tone in places. The "hangon" said (for non-admins) "I have just created this page for our new Non Profit Organization. I plan on spending a little time every week adding to its content. It should be up to your standards within a few months tops. Thank you for your consideration." Elluminati (talk · contribs) asked me why I had deleted it, so I replied, referring him to the need to show importance [and yes I foolishly also referred to the need to show notability, but I know that's not the test for a speedy deletion] and guidance on advertising and COI. His reply says that if I don't think the mission of the group is notable or important, I need to get a new hobby, and that he is not advertising but making known a worthy cause. I have suggested he leave the subject alone, and stop trying to promote his group, but if he can't do that, to write a neutrally-worded version in his userspace with references. Your thoughts please. Bencherlite^Talk 20:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Notes left for the author and the original tagger. Bencherlite^Talk 20:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

My name is Jesus Rodriguez and I am the President of a newly formed NON-PROFIT organization called the "Hispanic Commonweal". It is our mission to bring the necessary resources of information of Education, Health care, Faith and Politics to local Hispanic Communities, one family at a time in order to better the lives of those in our community.

To cut to the chase, I think the main issue we are having here is that this person who has brought us to this point seems to think that everyone is some kind of expert in Wikipedia contributing or is otherwise a spammer. I have never contributed anything before to Wiki and therefore am very new to the process. He/She is using terms and "Wiki" language that I am not familiar with. I am quite certain that a person does not have to be a Wiki "insider" to contribute worthy information. This idea that since I am closely involved with the organization that I cannot make the contribution to Wikipedia myself is understandable under normal circumstances but in this particular situation is an outrage and I am sure against the fundamental spirit of this encyclopedic website.

I understand that this is a community of volunteers and the need to weed out a bunch of spammers is constantly necessary. So I am not yet at a point of making this a public issue. I am a very determined Hispanic activist who is merely trying to make known an organization that is for the preservation of Traditional Hispanic Values. I am only wanting to post the facts about the organization. Where it was founded, who founded it and what it's mission statement is. I am also prepared to or have other people make pertinent updates to the page as we continue to move forward.

I hope that something can be worked out here. This idea, from the person who brought us here, that I am "advertising" is another outrage. This is an organization that not only pays no salaries but all the expenses, which has been thousands of dollars, have come out of my own pocket specifically. So I do not see any other reason why I can't be helped in this matter. I am willing, as I told the person, to make the proper adjustments and work on making it a very good "Wiki" page.

I ask for the support of this community to be able to make a page that allows the facts to be shown about our organization. If it is the insinuation for this person that everything in Wiki is established worthy and "notable" then we all know that is just not true.

In closing, I hope that this is not because we are a conservative organization. I have heard rumors about bias here in Wiki, and hope that those are just conspiracy freaks.

Just tell me what I need to do, without assuming that I speak Wiki language.

Thank you,

Jesus Rodriguez, President Hispanic Commonweal Oak Creek, WI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elluminati (talk • contribs) 21:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC). Moved from DRV talk page. Bencherlite^Talk 21:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse. The version at the time of deletion met criteria G11 (spam) and A7 (no assertion of significance of the organization) and was properly deleted. That said, Bencherlite is welcome to work on a page in userspace, making sure to craft it using neutral point-of-view and citing independent sources. Editing in userspace will give him the time to refine it. Then it can be reviewed and, if up to standards, moved to mainspace. —C.Fred (talk) 21:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you mean Elluminati - my name's not Jesus Rodriguez. Bencherlite^Talk 21:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse first it becomes notable, then it gets a WP p. We do just the same with liberal organizations also, and commercial, and books and records and artists and everything else. I apologize for the term advertising, but we interpret it to mean "promotional", and saying you want to make the organization known is just what is meant by "promotional" -- not just in our use, but in ordinary language too. It first has to become known quite apart from us. Promotion of one's organization and one;s political views are excellent things to do, but this is not the place. DGG (talk) 06:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep deleted per DGG. Please write about your organization on its own website. Stifle (talk) 08:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also note, this is Wikipedia, not Wiki. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia-speak answer: Endorse per DGG.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 08:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redstone Commercial Real Estate

Redstone Commercial Real Estate (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

Deletion was unreasonable Nathanlgordon (talk) 16:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please revisit the issue of the redstone commercial real estate page. All content was verifiable, the company was notable as per Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and the page was not an advertisement, and not attempting to sell anything, nor link to any external sales sites.

• Endorse deletion Tone was advertorial and anyway all the content appears to have been a copyvio of content from their own website - http://www.redstonevt.com/ Davewild (talk) 16:41, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss differences between that page and any other company pages that haven't been deleted. The content on those pages mirror their websites (for example, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters). The tone was informational, just like it should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanlgordon (talk • contribs) 16:43, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See what about X --82.7.40.7 (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've take a look at Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, I don't think the article is great and certainly needs some trimming, and it maybe touch and go as to if it covers the notability guidelines. (There are dupes in the sources, so the references are fewer than first apparent, one being used for some basic facts and isn't online so can't tell if it's anything more than a directoy style listing, one has a reasonable amount on the company, the other same award different year less, the other is a trade association award.) However if that needs work or even deletion doesn't remove the need for this article to be in line with the guidelines. --82.7.40.7 (talk) 17:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just added a ref from the NYT about their agreement to sell under the Newman's Own label. Stupid paywalls.... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse – spam. See "Vermont's commercial Real Estate leader". MuZemike 18:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse speedy deletion. - I was just about to delete it myself the 2nd time when Dank beat me to it, because of the copyright violation. I would say that even were Redstone to release their site content into GFDL/CC, the content is overly advertising-speak-laden. After all, I wouldn't expect a company to have neutral information about itself on its own website. Thats one of the entire reasons to have a website for your business: to attract customers. Syrthiss (talk) 18:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No independent verification for various claims in the article. And how does that "new" user know so much about "other stuff exists" articles? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Endorse this correct deletion. It was spam, no doubt about it.  Frank  |  talk  21:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse deletion as advertising, non-notable business, and/or copyvio. Take your pick. Note that saying "X has an article, so I should too" isn't a reasonable argument; see Don't add sewage to the already-polluted pond. Stifle (talk) 08:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mikie Da Poet

Mikie Da Poet (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

Deletion was entirely unreasonable. 24.14.132.100 (talk) 05:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Mikie Da Poet page has been blocked for many years, reading the editors comments, they stated he needs to be mentioned on a news segment as proof of his status, well he was! the instructions said to be bold, well here it is. Mikie da Poet was called the new Eminem by Fox News when he performed live on Fox News and was called a superstar by FOX anchor David Navarro years before the block was ever put on, if a good editor reads this, not only should they take off the block, but they should send an im sorry email to the person who was trying to despute the block. The first guy desputing this was perfectly correct, Mikie Da Poet is a well known well respected artist all over the world. heres the link to the live Fox News performance. thank you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb1lWbt3bk8

• When a page has been deleted so many times that an administrator has found it necessary to prevent recreation, it's usual to provide a draft of the article in userspace (see WP:SUBPAGE) for the community to assess. I would like to see one in this case. Stifle (talk) 08:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• From what my non-administrator self can see, it was deleted three times, the most recent being two years ago. Is there something I'm missing? Because I do not see sufficient grounds for a page protection that continues into mid-2009.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 11:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The IP editor is not asking for the page protection to be ended, he is asking for review of the article deletion. Drawn Some (talk) 12:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to re-read the nomination, Drawn Some.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 15:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Im not a editor, just a music fan, I dont know why Mikie was blocked to begin with, the proof the second editor ask for was sothing solid, solid proof, like a news segmant as he worded it, I provided that news segmant that shows Mikie is a established artist at the least. I dont know what page protection is, im asking that the block be lifted and Mikie Da Poet's name be aloud to sit with the other great names from Chicago and all over the world that he has worked with without being distured or deleted. Business as usual "trailer" search it anywhere, the most anticipated hip hop documentary ever, and they asked mikie to do the soundtrack, you can watch this and hear his song playing see his name in the credits, krs1, kanye west, dr cornell west, every big name in hip hop is on this project, and they used Mikie's old song from 7 years ago as the soundtrack. what is the reason why his name is blocked to begin with, this man has three albums in stores that can be purchased now, are you saying that this man is not worthy or does not have the credits to be on this websight? I have provided you with more credit then earlier editors asked from the other person desputing this artists name, his accomplishments in music deserve to be witness by the world. and to the nice professional person who wrote above, thank you for the advice, but when i click the links, I get lost, im not good at this, but i believe the public should see that they blocked Mikie, his fans would find it insulting, just because a man retires, doesnt mean block him for know reason and act like he never was great when the credits and albums are right in the editors lap.

• Endorse deletion; draft new version in userspace. First, as to the deletion review proper, the last deletion of the article was correct: it did not present anything new beyond what was in the article when the AfD results were to delete it. Second, the title is salted via transclusion: that's why the page doesn't show as protected. Finally, the issue of whether to unprotect/unsalt the title is not the issue here. In my opinion, the best way to argue that it should be unsalted is to create an article in userspace with sufficient assertions of notability and independent sourcing that it is clearly superior to the old version. With the new article in hand, it's very easy to justify unsalting and moving the candidate article to Mikie Da Poet. —C.Fred (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I love this guys music and thought he should have a page, I read the old logs on why this artist was deleted, and it makes no sense, the Fox News performance above, link included, should be enough to lift the block and give this guy a page or what ever its called, im disapointed in your ability to guide me in the right direction the help this artist get his name up with the other greats, us everyday people dont understand directions that just take you in circles and lead to more messages and bigger words. he should have never been blocked to begin with, this block was done on purpose in my oppinion, so Mikie if you ever read this, get someone real smart that understands this process, cause i dont.

Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy (closed)