Talk:Lundby (company)

Overt advertisement
Wikipedia is not a format to advertise your goods or services.

General criteria Articles WP:NOR Perhaps before removing the tag, you should check Wiki policy. Simply removing the speedy delete tag doesn't mean it will go away. Mystar 20:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) 4 Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote some entity and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic.
 * 1) 7 No assertion of importance/significance
 * Actually, yes, if I - not the originator - remove the CSD tag, do not put it back on. This page is far from "blatant" advertising. A quick google search shows the size, scope and history of this company and a quick search of the author's edit history, as well as the edit history by multiple editors show that this is not advertising. And "first to use electric lights" is a pretty straightforward assertion of significance. Smashville 21:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

As I understand it, no you do not. I also double checked with an admin today to be sure. At anyrate this page only has origional reasearch (not in keeping with Wiki protocols).

Lundby's clams that they are the "first to use electric lights" is not a pretty straightforward assertion of significance. It may be if it were cited and provable, but it isn't

They lists a blatent advertisment to a web page al set for taking your orders, states "Lundby claims to have been" and "always striving to follow the trends of interial decorating", again a "personal POV and not at all in keeping with Wiki policy. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles until or unless authorized to do so. If you do not believe the article should be deleted, then please place hangon on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Before you go off on it again, I took a look over your talk page and find thise that are applicable to this discussion, "The existence of the article itself and the gigantic company logo are both pretty unacceptable. Smashville 17:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)"

"I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Spam and Wikipedia:Notability. If you are notable, someone else will create a page for you. Smashville 04:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)"

"However, being ranked 1 millionth in something is hardly notable. Smashville 20:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)"

I truly do not wish to have any dispute or sire any ill feelings, I simply passed by this page, read it, asked the opinion of two admin's who also fel it was advertising. So if you feel that it is note worthy, then please make your case, as is protocol, rather than simply take it upon yourself to deleate. I have discussed it with a couple of administrators who also felt it was blatant advertising, as per Wiki policy and not even close to asserting any form of notability. Clearly we see "Original research", POV, Blatant website advertising, linking the page to their own website ready to take your orders! Simply because a manufacture has been around and has been selling this or that, does not make it "note worthy". SO to that end I've requested an AFD. Mystar 01:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * My edits and comments about other articles are irrelevant to this discussion. Especially those edits...considering there is no gigantic company logo, this is not an article a person wrote about himself and no one claimed to be ranked 1 millionth in something...those are completely and totally irrelevant. And - as I stated before - I am within every right to remove a speedy deletion template. Not to mention, it is completely inappropriate to post comments from my talk page on a page that I did not edit and have no history with other than removing a speedy deletion template. Warning anyone for spam on this page is absurd. Warning me - a person who has made no edits on this page other than the removal of an inappropriate speedy deletion template and who has zero knowledge of the subject - is simply, simply inappropriate. My edits - and my talk page history - are absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. The fact of the matter is that this is not "advertising", it is especially not "blatant advertising". I suggest you take a look at WP:SPAM and WP:AGF. Smashville 14:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)