User talk:Ah1275

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Wisdom89 (talk) 21:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

T3 (The Think Tank)
A tag has been placed on T3 (The Think Tank), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of T3 (The Think Tank) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. JohnCD (talk) 18:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an advertising service or business directory. Before writing about your own business, please read Business' FAQ. JohnCD (talk) 18:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
The recent edit you made to T3 (The Think Tank) constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. Keilana | Parlez ici 18:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC))
 * Ignore the message just above - often when a page is blanked it is vandalism, and gets reverted almost without thinking. In this case I presume you blanked it because had realised that it wasn't appropriate for Wikipedia. I have arranged for it to be deleted. Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of T3 (The Think Tank)
A tag has been placed on T3 (The Think Tank) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. EJF (talk) 18:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of T3 (The Think Tank)
A tag has been placed on T3 (The Think Tank) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. EJF (talk) 18:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * "This advertising agency is one of the top 100 in the United States and the largest wholly female owned agency. Most advertising agencies are large conglomerates of smaller groups and are publicly traded. This agency is noteworthy partially because it is different. Am I free to recreate the page or is it still not "noteworthy" enough?" - This is the kind of substantive, if unsourced, assertion of notability that should have been put on the article in the first place, rather than a gigantic graphic of an office building. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  18:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I must agree with OrangeMike - if properly sourced, that does seem to indicate that the company may be notable. Since the article has been deleted several times, I'd recommend writing the article in your userspace and showing it to other editors before posting it. If you can show (through reliable, secondary sources) that the company is notable, then you may find that consensus would favor a re-creation of the article. Repeatedly re-posting the same article will only make that goal more difficult. I might recommend starting the article here, in your userspace. Add your sources, and even ask for help in copyediting if you wish. Once you have an article that is neutral, non-promotional, and discusses why this company is notable though secondary sources, then we can discuss re-posting it. But not until then, OK? Please leave a message at my talk page with any questions. Thanks. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 18:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I was in the middle of editing it when it was pulled down. In a collaborate environment it seems we should have slightly more time to adjust postings.Ah1275 (talk) 18:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks much better - but I can't see the company's website, since the computer I'm on does not have flash. I've formatted the references for you, but it looks like you're in good shape. If you have a logo to upload, don't forget to add a fair use rationale - or ping my talk page and I'll help with that. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 19:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the help. I've referenced the HTML site and made both available in the "website section" on the left. Is it appropriate to add images at this point?

Ah1275 (talk) 19:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The licensing on that image looks good. I added a Fair use rationale, which explains why the use of a copyrighted image is OK for that article. Logos are simple, since any logo would be copyrighted. Thanks for the html site, I'll have a look. As for other images... that's tricky. You don't want the article to be an image gallery, and you don't want more images than text content... So, to be honest, I'd expand the text first. Maybe discuss the company's growth and ownership (which, as you note, is unusual, especially as a wholly female-owned company). A photo of the company's headquarters, in that context, probably wouldn't be a bad idea. Prominent or notable projects for some of those national clients would also be worthwhile, and a photo of packaging or campaign materials would help to illustrate that. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 19:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * This article talks about T3's work with Dell. That might be useful in talking about some of the company's high profile projects. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 19:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's another one that talks about the company in general terms. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 19:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Citing Refs
The easiest way is using Ref Name. Find the first instance of this reference, and cite it as normal - except, instead of to the end. In the references list, you'll see one reference with several links back to the article where it is used (a,b,c,etc). UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 19:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It was a misplaced forward slash - I've corrected it. Looks good, otherwise. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 20:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem at all, glad to help. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 20:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The speedy tags above
In case anyone was wondering and to reduce confusion, those speedy tags above were placed on previous versions of this article which had not asserted notability.

Hope I've cleared things up!

Cheers, EJF (talk) 17:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:T3SF.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:T3SF.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:T3-logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:T3-logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)