User talk:Claus Pedersen

Speedy deletion of MyHoliday.com
A tag has been placed on MyHoliday.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of 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 our the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

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 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. ukexpat (talk) 21:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of MyHoliday.com
A tag has been placed on MyHoliday.com 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 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. ukexpat (talk) 13:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your message on my talk page. First, I did not delete the above article. As the notice clearly explains, I nominated the article for speedy deletion on the basis that the subject matter was not notable. It was actually deleted by an admin. Please see WP:N and WP:Notability (organizations and companies) for the relevant guidance about establishing notability for companies. – ukexpat (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for being unclear. I understand that you didn't delete it directly, but only indirectly by nominating it for deletion. Can you please explain to me why the company article of Holidaylettings is more noteable than the article I wrote about myHoliday.com?

Claus Pedersen (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I am afraid that "other stuff exists" is not a valid argument for retaining an article (see WP:OSE). However I have looked at the Holidaylettings article and I think there are problems with it -- it barely asserts notability and does not cite any verifiable references. I have nominated it for deletion under the AfD process. – ukexpat (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand that "other stuff exists" is not a valid argument for retaining an article, BUT as WP:OSE states "This may be an argument that this article is not bad enough to be speedily deleted". I think that it would be fine if it was nominated under the AfD process so I could discuss it with everybody.

Claus Pedersen (talk) 20:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)