User talk:Randykitty: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:32, 10 October 2017

I am greatly reducing the time that I am spending on WP and may not be immediately available. If you need an admin, please go to WP:AN.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

Checking Deleted Page: The Marketer (Building)

Hi! I saw that you deleted a recent page The Marketer (Building). The page was originally added with filler copy that was promotional but was quickly changed to meet Wikipedia standards. Can you please confirm was remaining details caused the page to be deleted so that I can correct them? or if this page was deleted after meeting the standards, can you please re-activate the page?Arachlow (talk) 15:15, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Arachlow[reply]

It was obvious spam. --Randykitty (talk) 15:16, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Randy, the page was updated to not be "spam". The company believes this to be a relevant landmark as it makes use of a previously historic building and it is now a foundational piece of architecture in the community. Please reconsider the deletion and let me know if i need to make further changes to the page in order to have it be qualified. I belive that if you follow the sources and see the impact the company and building will have on the community that you will not find the page to be spam. Arachlow (talk) 17:14, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Arachlow[reply]

"...four floors of forward thinking nestled in the historic Over-the-Rhine neighborhood of downtown..." It can hardly be spammier. Discussion here closed. You can try WP:REFUND (although they don't like G11-deleted articles), if any of the admins there is willing to undelete, that's fine with me, but I'm not going to do that. --Randykitty (talk) 17:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Randy, I appreciate that feedback. If I fix that sentence and change to the article to be more academic, would you reconsider? I am still relatively new to adding proper content, but I want to make sure I am adding valuable and valid content to Wikipedia. I really appreciate the feedback and I am eager to correct any wrongs that you see on the page. Arachlow (talk) 17:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Arachlow[reply]

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 :*Randy, the page was updated to not be "spam". The company believes this to be a relevant landmark as it makes use of a previously historic building and it is now a foundational piece of architecture in the community. Please reconsider the deletion and let me know if i need to make further changes to the page in order to have it be qualified. I belive that if you follow the sources and see the impact the company and building will have on the community that you will not find the page to be spam. [[User:Arachlow|Arachlow]] ([[User talk:Arachlow|talk]]) 17:14, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Arachlow
 ::* "...four floors of forward thinking nestled in the historic [[Over-the-Rhine]] neighborhood of downtown..." It can hardly be spammier. Discussion here closed. You can try [[WP:REFUND]] (although they don't like G11-deleted articles), if any of the admins there is willing to undelete, that's fine with me, but I'm not going to do that. --[[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty#top|talk]]) 17:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
+Randy, I appreciate that feedback. If I fix that sentence and change to the article to be more academic, would you reconsider? I am still relatively new to adding proper content, but I want to make sure I am adding valuable and valid content to Wikipedia. I really appreciate the feedback and I am eager to correct any wrongs that you see on the page. [[User:Arachlow|Arachlow]] ([[User talk:Arachlow|talk]]) 17:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Arachlow