User:L293D/article deletion

{| style="border:4px solid #00FF33; width:97%; -moz-border-radius:8px;" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" align="center"

''Note: If your article is about a company, an association, a club, or a non-profit organisation, please read WP:BFAQ first. ''

''Note: If your article is about a school, please read WP:WPSCH first. ''

''Note: If your article is about you, or someone you represent, please read WP:ASFAQ first. ''

If you're reading this, it's probably because I either tagged your page for deletion, following either speedy deletion (read on), a proposal  for deletion (See note below), or sent it for a deletion debate (See note below). I may have tagged it for requiring some other urgent attention while doing New Page Patrol (See note below). If it was subsequently deleted, and you came to my talk page to ask why I thought your page should be deleted, first let me assure you that I did not lightly consider consigning your hard work to the digital dustbin - so if you want it restored you  can talk to me after reading all the rules yourself.

Most new articles get tagged or deleted because the authors did not bother to read our instructions, or sufficiently prepare them either offline or in their  user sandbox before publishing them to live article space.

However, now that you are here looking for answers, I'll see if I can help you out.

There are four major reasons I would tag a new article for deletion, or quickly delete it myself (anyone can tag articles - only administrators can actually delete them): it is non-encyclopedic, it is a copyright violation, it is an advertisement, spam, or vanity page, or it is an attack page or other form of vandalism.


 * Clear, uncontroversial nonsense, spam, vandalism, personal attacks: Within  seconds.
 * Totally unreferenced BLP (WP:BLPPROD): within 5 - 10 minutes in an attempt to catch the creators while they are still  online and logged in.
 * Empty pages and almost empty pages: usually after about  15 - 20 minutes. If an editor  can't  get  something on  the page within  that time, they are hardly likely to make a constructive page any  time soon. The effort however, is still  in  an attempt to catch the creators while they are still online and logged in.
 * If the title suggests that the page is likely to  be unsuitable  for the encyclopedia, I may tag faster.
 * Note: I always run checks to see if the page is an editor's first article.

Non-encyclopedic pages
The most basic standard for inclusion in Wikipedia is notability--that is, whether or not the subject has received significant attention from the press or other truly reliable sources (not blogs or pages you or your company made, or directory sites). Wikipedia is not a place to establish one's notability, and so things like the band you started with your friends, the shop down the street that sells good donuts, your primary school, a game you made up in the schoolyard, or a company you  think should get  some free advertising here (unless they've been written about elsewhere reliably first because they  have done something  spectacular of note).

If your subject has been written about elsewhere, you have to say why. Creating an article that just says "Paul is a really good cook" doesn't provide a starting point for other editors to build on. Who is Paul? What kind of food does he cook? Who says he's good? How do we find out more about him? Now, an article that says "Paul Prudhomme is a world-class cajun chef who hosts the show Paul Prudhomme's Always Cooking! on PBS"...that gives you something to sink your teeth into and for a dessert, you can serve up the references to the source you found it in!

And finally, articles which just can't become articles--articles with random text or no content (I'll generally give the latter about 5 to 10 minutes to be expanded).

Copyright violations
Sadly, all the notability in the world can't save a copyright violation. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, and as such we must use free content (with a couple of fair-use exceptions). If you copied most or all of your article from another website, or even closely rewrote it from another source, chances are near 100% that it's going to stay deleted. After all, with a handful of exceptions that text is copyrighted by the website you took it from - even if it was your own web site, and its unauthorized use can land Wikipedia in a heap of trouble. You can write an article using the website as a source--but pure copying is a big no-no.

Advertisements or spam
Wikipedia is not an advertising service, and the community is very sensitive to being treated as one. If you wrote an article that reads like advertising copy--if it extolls the virtues of your product, uses marketing terms like "dynamic" and "capable" and "world-leading expertise" to describe your company, boasts about how your website is the fastest growing ceramic-troll related forum on the internet--it's probably going to stay deleted.

Surprisingly enough, this includes companies you may not be associated with. An overenthusiastic analysis of a company by a genuine fan can be mistaken for something drafted by that company's marketing department (after all, it's not that difficult to fake). If this is the case, then I'm sorry your article was deleted but you simply need to tone it down next time. Also, see reason one above about Notability. If no one else, outside of Wikipedia, has written about your company yet, in great detail, in a book or national daily newspaper, it's highly unlikely that Wikipedia will be willing to be "Your Big Break".

And finally, this criteria doesn't just apply to companies alone--articles about products, bands, schools, and even individuals that are created (or seem to have been created) primarily to promote their subject fall into this category as well.

Attack pages or other form of vandalism
Writing an article saying "Becky is hot" is one thing. Writing an article comparing her ass to a bowl of week-old clam chowder is another. Wikipedia does not tolerate personal attacks of any kind, be they against editors online or people (and companies) you know in the real world. While it's only natural to want to blow off steam every now and then, Wikipedia is simply not a forum for spontaneous free thought. The same goes for nonsense pages created in misplaced humour.

If you want your article back, you need to ask me very nicely. I may or may not comply with your request, depending on the type of page that was deleted (i.e. a page deleted because notability was not established is much more likely to be restored than an attack page or pure copyright violation). If I do not comply and you believe your article was deleted against procedure, you can list it for review at Wikipedia deletion review, although your time and energy would more likely be better spent writing a new and improved version.

If you want the maintenance tags removed, make the required fixes. Consider that if another editor could fix them, there is no reason why you can't do it yourself - other editors don't have access to other secret resources and editing tools that  you  don't know about. If you really feel that your  contribution is important but you lack the literary flair to put it into encyclopedic language, don't be afraid to say so on the article's talk page and some kind-hearted soul from the Guild of Copyeditors will clean it up for you. You could also ask me (very) nicely - and more privately - on my talk page.

I hope this helped answer some of your questions. If you're still confused or want to leave a comment, feel free to leave me a message at User talk:L293D. Be sure to refer to the guidelines (WP:TPG) for talk page use and layout, post your message at  the bottom of the page, and sign your post with four tildes, ( ~ ) so I know who you are!

A plea for YOUR help: If you feel strongly about the quality of our encyclopedia - and I believe you do - you  may  wish  to consider joining us in helping carry out some of these thankless but necessary 'housekeeping' tasks. For most of them, you don't even need to  be an admin, but  if you  like, you can also join one or more projects (such as the one that I created and manage) that  work on your area of specialisation. We have a huge backlog of things to do - especially improving articles that have been tagged for attention!


 * }