User talk:DarkSaber2k
I respond to all messages left on my talk page here on my talk page. Please click here to leave a message.
NOTE: If I have archived a conversation that you wish to continue, please politely let me know and I will retrieve it. They have not been deleted, and are easily located just to the right of this notice under 'Archives'.
Hi
I just received a warning for my Ideal Cruising page as it is considered as a blatant advertising.
Apart from offering cruise deals we are providing our visitors with latest cruise news and cruise reviews, details of port-of-calls and destinations and we approaching this aspect of our business as a very valuable one. The website provides with latest cruise news and cruise critics allowing visitors to make just choice on which cruise line or ship to choose. We created cruise community website full of advices for people taking the trips. Cruise reviews are extremely useful for people planning to go on holidays. All data used across the cruise reviews, cruise news and cruise critic pages doesn't have any commercial value and based on cruise travelers' experiences only.
Could you please revise your opinion or give us any suggestions by how to avoid removing the page?
Do u consider , suitable for us?
Kind regards,
Jane
- It is not being deleted for advertising on this occasion, it's being deleted for failing to make any assertion of notability. You should also take a look at the conflict of interest guidelines. As it stands, I will not revise my opinion and nothing will avoid the removal of the page. And as I said, recreating previously deleted material (especially under a slightly different name to avoid it being detected (this is how it tends to be viewed by editors)) can lead to a temporary, or, in the case of persistent policy violations, permanent block from Wikipedia. DarkSaber2k 14:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the detailed answer.
I do believe we didn't confront with the conflict of interests. Our deleted page was revised. The website was updated. We didn't make any attempts to avoid detecting. The account was passed over to me at this stage, i wasn't fully aware and decided investigated the process.
Still I consider Ideal Cruising website noteable.
Please have a look on this articles, they might be handy
Newspapers:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2007090037,00.html
http://travel.independent.co.uk/news_and_advice/article319660.ece
As an award winning travel agency we have features running on us in several newspapers on a regular basis.
Regards,
Jane
- I'm not sure whether the links you posted are good examples of secondary sources. They also do not satisfy the requirement for "significant coverage" as established in the general notability guidelines - merely having the company's name mentioned is not enough, it must be mentioned in detail. Finally, to clarify: merely including these sources does not establish notability - the article should establish why the company is considered noteable, and use reliable sources to verify this.
I'd encourage you to take some time to read about notability, verifiability and what Wikipedia is not (especially WP:NOT#SOAPBOX, and try to come up with a structured argument based around those guidelines/policies.
On another note, I would appreciate it if you would sign your posts in future by placing ~~~~ at the end. DarkSaber2k 15:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Killer notebooks wiki
You are absolutely right. Please delete the page I created "Killer notebooks" and I will revise the material at a later date and attempt to rectify the problems with it. Dsze4446 09:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Rambøll Management
Hi
Thank you for your message concerning Rambøll Management. Sorry about deleting the speedy deletion tag. I am reading up on them as well as the criterias to avoid further confution. However, I don't quite see why the page about Rambøll Management is considered not important enough to be part of Wikipedia? They are one of two or three most important management companies in Denmark, their surveys are quoted daily in the Danish media and they are an significant part of the Rambøll Group, the largest consulting engineer group in Scandinavia.
I plan to write more on it as well as on the Rambøll Group and other Scandinavian consulting engineers, so I hope you will reconsider the article.
Best regards, Espen Nikolaisen
- I would recommend starting off by having a look at WP:CORP. It contains the widely used guidelines for what wikipedia considers notable about companies. If you have any specific question afterwards, feel free to ask me and I'll do my best to answer them. At the moment, the main problem with the article is that it has no reliable secondary sources to allow verification of the companies importance. Secondary sources have to be non-trivial (I.E. more than a couple of sentences), independent of the company (so press releases in news services would not be accepted for example) and there have to be multiple sources. As long as you can provide these, the article should be perfectly acceptable for wikipedias criteria. DarkSaber2k 12:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. I couldn't find any such references in the article about COWI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COWI_A/S) for instance, but I am more than happy to provide them. Do I include them in the article or is it for "your eyes only"? Here are som references:
From the German Ministry of the Interior: http://www.bmi.bund.de/cln_028/nn_148248/Internet/Content/Themen/Integration/Einzelseiten/Evaluation__Summary__en.html From the (Danish) Copenhagen Post: http://www.cphpost.dk/get/84577.html From the (Danish) virk.dk (on Corporate Social Responsibility): http://www.virk.dk/VirkPortal/site/VidenOgVaerktoej/Oekonomi/TemaOverskudOmtanke/English.aspx From an Lithuaninan anti-corruption project: http://www.vpu.lt/sdc/antikorupcija/en/bl.htm From the homepage of the Euro-Mediterranean Transport System: http://euromedtransport.org/235.0.html
OK, these would need to be included in the article at the bottom in a 'References' section. That should make the article safe from speedy deletion, although it would be advisible to have a read of some of the article guidelines to see how the article could be 'wikified', which would help prevent any problems further down the line. DarkSaber2k 13:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have added this to the article and will continue reading up on the guidelines. Thank you for your patience! Espnik 16:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
speady deletion
Newgate potential, Shredder and Your God is Dead are really important bands in the youth community in belgium, The H8000 and its bands are famous in japan, western europe and USA, notably NY. I feel this is information that has the right to be made public on wikipedia.
PS: sorry if i voilated some rules but i'm new to the wikipedia editor community. i left a message on the talk pages and i thought i could delete the heading your bott placed.
Greetings Nelson
A wikipedia fan
Why have you redirected the Evilyn page to the Clandestine album?
I've removed the speedy tag since it looked to me like there might be enough of a claim of notability that you should take the article to AfD. JoshuaZ 16:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Bossaball
Hi DarkSaber2k.
I'm intrigued to understand why you feel Bossaball does not merit inclusion as a genuine, albeit recent, history of the use of trampolines in a sport other than pure trampolining. Now I am a 'pure trampolining' fan but I do consider it of interest to know where and how trampolines are used in other guises if only to make me feel superior in the knowledge that we do it properly and safely ;-)
Have you checked out Bossaball entries on the web - it seems to have quite a following and even international matches (e.g. http://www.dailymotion.com/zjokol/video/x1banm_bossaball-brasil-vs-espana) - I must confess I thought them quite fun to watch and wouldn't be at all surprised if it doesn't get regular air-time on sports channels before long if only because of the mix of dynamic skill and speed.
Answers to dave@brentwoodtc.org will get to me quicker unless in Trampoline Talk where I will pick it up quickly.
DaveK@BTC 09:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, but what does 'it's fun to watch' have to do with whether or not it should have a wikipedia article? If the sport got regular air-time on sports channels, then you would have firmer grounds on which to build an article. Until then, saying it WILL become notable is preditcing the future, which is against policy for articles. DarkSaber2k 09:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Please do not attack other users as you did on the Collusion (band) talk page. This could be grounds to block you as a disruption. Stevec240 10:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)