User talk:Anto217

February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Platelet Rich Plasma has been reverted.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): (?<![^\s:])[^\s\]\[\{\}\\\|^\/`<>@:]+@\w+(?!\.htm)(?:\.\w+){1,3} (links: info@biotecca.com). It appears that you inserted an e-mail address to Platelet Rich Plasma. Wikipedia pages should not contain personal information. For more information, please read Wikipedia:Biography of Living People, specifically the section about personal information.

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Platelet Rich Plasma
helpme

I was trying to figure out why was the article I included for "PRP (platelet-rich plasma" deleted?. As far as I know, I accomplished all the reference requirements and else but, since I am completely new at this, I suppose there was something I didn´t do... would you be so kind to let me know, in order to fix it and try to place it again correctly?
 * Going to Platelet Rich Plasma shows the deletion log, which has the reason it was deleted and the administrator who performed the deletion. It was deleted under criteria for speedy deletion G11, which means it was considered blatant advertising. You can read about it more at Criteria for speedy deletion, where it describes G11 as, "Pages that exclusively promote some entity and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion."  I didn't see the article before it was deleted so I don't know what its content was or why it was considered.  You can ask the administrator, Nihiltres, why it was deleted if you wish.  --Mysdaao talk 14:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * (after edit conflict) Here is its deletion log entry. It was deleted as blatant advertising under section g11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. I agree that the material on the specific company at the end had a tinge of advertising about it and would have backed removal from the article of the that content unless a more neutral point of view statement of the various products on the market was added without any peacock language and opinion on which is better than another. But I do not believe that this was a proper candidate for speedy deletion under the criterion cited. In my opinion, all that was needed was removal of a sentence or two. It did not meet: "Pages that exclusively promote some entity and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." What you should do is politely discuss the deletion with the administrator who deleted the article, by going to his/her talk page and inquiring about possible restoration. Many users who do so approach this in an affronted manner, and demand the page they created be restored. I do not know that you would do this, but I just wanted to pre-advise you that this is always the wrong approach. If the discussion is not fruitful, you do have the option of taking the article to deletion review where others will decide whether the deletion was proper or not. Another option is to ask Nihiltres to post the material on a subpage and work on it there to remove the advertising content and only then post it (or move it) to the article namespace. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

thank you so much... My problem is being solved...
 * You're welcome.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)