Talk:Bayview Apartment

Articles for deletion notice
Dear Sir/Madam My name is Donald Tong. I am very interested in your website and actually now I become a very frequent viewer of your website, which provides to me enormous knowledge I required. I created an article called Bayview Apartment, which was built by the collapsed developer Westpoint. Westpoint became Australian newspaper headlines since February 2006 due to its $300 million collapse. Also Bayview Apartment has some unique features I mentioned in that article. This morning I found your staff cleaned my external links within the article but left a sign "]" beside the wording "Institute of Body Corporate Managers (Victoria)" within the page. I thought it might be an error in the editing so that I inserted the external link back again (I am neither a Real Estate agent or a body corporate manager). Also I added some internal links. After that changing, I found my article become an "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy." I realised my article might not have notable feature at the beginning due to a learning curve but I am trying to improve that. Would be my article definitely deleted eventually? Your advice would be greatly appreciated. Best Regards Donald Tong —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donaldtong (talk • contribs)


 * Hello. Yes, the article is likely to be deleted, for there is no assertion of notability for inclusion on Wikipedia. You may follow the discussion on Articles for deletion/Bayview Apartment. Regards.-- Hús  ö  nd  13:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Donald, writing new articles on Wikipedia can be a little intimidating at first because of all the rules that are around to try and keep the quality high. The deletion notice is a notice that there is a debate going on by the community about whether or not the article should be deleted.  You're a part of the community and can take part in the debate.  Click here to go to the debate. (You should make sure you are logged in when you participate - anonymous comments, i.e. ones from an IP address, are given little weight in these debates).


 * The reason given for recommending for deletion is that it seems like either advertising for the complex (you did some things that are commonly associated with article spamming when you wrote this up), or a conflict of interest (i.e. you are writing an article aout something you have an interest in and therefore put our neutral point of view policy at risk) (see also editing with a conflict of interest). These two things in themselves don't damn an article on this subject (though they may mean it won't be the article you have written here), but it is also claimed that there is nothing notable about the apartment complex. Your reason above may be enough, but there needs to be more than your assertion that this is the case.  You need to verify that assertion from reliable sources.


 * I suggest you find coverage of the bankruptcy and the impact it had on investors and others from the most well known and respected newspapers and journals that you can. Make the article more about the bankruptcy and cite those sources in the article. To sway the deletion debate you will probaby need this to have been covered by national or international news organizations in a fairly substantial manner.  Linking to search results, non-reliable sources (like personal web-pages or publications without a reputation for good fact-checking), or sites that simply acknowledge the existence of the apartment complex is unlikely to be enough.  If you have questions about this please feel free to contact me on my talk page.  --Siobhan Hansa 13:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)