Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sellstate: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===[[Sellstate]]=== |
===[[Sellstate]]=== |
||
'''Potential Spam''' (Which has been changed):Original reason for deletion was '''Spam''' - edited to potential spam by voter [[User:DaveOMac]] |
'''Potential Spam''' (Which has been changed):Original reason for deletion was '''Spam''' - edited to potential spam by voter [[User:DaveOMac]]<br> |
||
'''Spam''' was deleted by first time voter [[User:Sellstate]] |
'''Spam''' was deleted by first time voter [[User:Sellstate]] |
||
*'''Strong Keep''' I don't understand why there is such a need to delete this article it's been corrected and no longer reads as spam. As long as the article stays unbias, I see no reason to delete it. If the first time user was a violator, then perhaps a warning to him should be sent. The original author of this article has also apparently tried to delete it. |
*'''Strong Keep''' I don't understand why there is such a need to delete this article it's been corrected and no longer reads as spam. As long as the article stays unbias, I see no reason to delete it. If the first time user was a violator, then perhaps a warning to him should be sent. The original author of this article has also apparently tried to delete it. |
||
Revision as of 20:00, 22 June 2006
Potential Spam (Which has been changed):Original reason for deletion was Spam - edited to potential spam by voter User:DaveOMac
Spam was deleted by first time voter User:Sellstate
- Strong Keep I don't understand why there is such a need to delete this article it's been corrected and no longer reads as spam. As long as the article stays unbias, I see no reason to delete it. If the first time user was a violator, then perhaps a warning to him should be sent. The original author of this article has also apparently tried to delete it.
- Keep This article has been changed to have a more opinionated feel and no longer has any mention from the CEO
- Strong Delete as per my nom. Dlyons493 Talk 21:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as an ad (the following are things to keep in mind - if the page contains contact details, a signature block of a CEO or manager, full of value-laden happy adjectives or clichés such as 'revolutionary', 'dynamic' &c, a list of products or services or a menu, an operating history that is described in anyway as being 'proud' or all American/suitable nationality-owned, &c). Basically see WP:NOT and WP:NPOV (is there a specific advertising guideline/proposal?) Jammo (SM247) 23:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as non-notable corporation. —Quarl (talk) 2006-06-22 08:07Z