User talk:Droppoth

Welcome!
Hello, Droppoth, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Wilkinsons...The Opticians, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Dewritech (talk)  10:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Wilkinsons...The Opticians


A tag has been placed on Wilkinsons...The Opticians, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here.  Dewritech (talk)  10:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Why your article was deleted
Your article had two problems:
 * It was written in promotional PR-speak, full of what we call "puffery", unsourced adjectives of praise: "dedicated... high quality... progressive... advanced... award-winning... highest standards of personal service!" Wikipedia is not for advertising or promotion of any kind and anything like that is deleted at sight. An encyclopedia article should not contain opinions like that, only plain facts, neutrally stated and cited to reliable sources.
 * It gave no indication that the company is notable enough for an encyclopedia article. "Notability" is the name of Wikipedia's inclusion criterion, which is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? Many worthy people and organizations cannot pass that test, which is not at all to their discredit but means that they are not suitable subjects for an encyclopedia.

In fact, articles about Wilkinsons have been deleted before, see the deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/Wilkinsons...the Opticians. If you want to try again, you would do best to make a userspace draft by clicking on Help:Userspace draft, but think hard about notability first because if you cannot demonstrate it you will be wasting your time. JohnCD (talk) 11:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)