User talk:Getupstandup1

Repost of Ulteo

A tag has been placed on Ulteo, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how Ulteo is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Ulteo saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions.

AfD result to delete was largly due to failure of WP:RS. New article follows in the same problem and is the same as the one previously deleted. Pmedema (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My answer

This is wrong:

Ulteo is notorious (look for the number of google entries)
my article was written from scratch (ie *not* a repost)

I see no reason for deletion or you _really_ have something against Ulteo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Getupstandup1 (talk • contribs) 10:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 June 8#Ulteo, your re-write of the Ulteo article has been restored; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulteo (2nd nomination). — Athaenara ✉ 01:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with page deletion:Ulteo

The following was posted on my talk page:

It seems that you have deleted all the work I did to write a documented and Wikipedia-compliant article about Ulteo. If you think that Ulteo is not notorious, just look for it on Google and see the number of pages about it. If you think my post was a repost of the previous Ulteo page, you are wrong: it was written from scratch and took me hours to search for information and references.
So please get the Ulteo page, I think there is no reason to delete it.
Sorry if it's not the good place to discuss but I don't see any other way to get in touch.
Getupstandup1 (talk) 10:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I recommend Wikipedia:Deletion review. — Athaenara ✉ 11:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I forwarded it here with my original reply. — Athaenara ✉ 23:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Getupstandup1. You have new messages at Pmedema's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Getupstandup1, I agree with you that an Ulteo page is WP-worthy, especially considering that we have pages for other coLinux projects such as andLinux and Topologilinux. Many of the 'Delete' comments in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ulteo_(2nd_nomination) seem to be under the misguided impression that andLinux & Ulteo are 'J.A.L.D.' and don't seem to recognize the significance of these products (How many other products allow me to run Ubuntu applications alongside Windows, without requiring a little VM window?) and 'Keep' comments were pretty weak. Several of us tried to a complete rewrite of this article, but it was deleted again, partially because we didn't reference enough external sources. User:Tikiwont moved the article to User:Gigglesworth/Ulteo for now. Please feel free to edit. Maybe we can try again, with better external sources. Frankly, some of those editors seem to have some sort of bias against Ulteo, and I feel like the odds are stacked against us though. I'm not sure that I have enough time to own the article, and would be happy to move it to your userspace. -= Gigglesworth (talk) 19:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gigglesworth...

I found it odd that Ulteo is deleted and locked as such. The reasons supporting deletion are dubious. When doing a search via Google for all wikipedia articles on Ulteo other languages, I found that these pages all exist AND without any dubious deletion requests.

This situation smacks of someone deliberately willfully changing history. Trying to make Ulteo a non-entity in Wikipedia so that there can be no proper direct reference to it, its history, its connection to Linux, virtualization, cloud computing, its use of Java, its use of VNC, connections to OpenOffice, and so on. With the deletion and lock in place, I cannot even include any of what i just said. At least I cannot in English. :(

In the English speaking world, the copy of Ulteo the page you authored that you keep in your User space might be the only evidence that it had ever existed before. Right now, yours is the only one returned in the English speaking world. I remember reading the proper page a while back.

From the talk page on the Ulteo deletion, it seemed it might have been decided by only a handful of people.

This is chilling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.94.139.101 (talk) 09:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]