User talk:Floptimusprime/GuardianEdge

GuardianEdge
Hi, thought I would bring this to your talk page since 1) it looks lonely here and 2) it gives you a nice, friendly orange bar to tell you about it. I can't see this deleted article, so my comments are based on what I've seen in business articles in general.

Sources for businesses are actually pretty tricky business. Sometimes a business or product is rather well-known but still doesn't quite make the cut, and sometimes the way an article was written will get it deleted anyway. Two things to consider with a business article are: Of course this enthusiasm is one of the reasons there's a conflict of interest policy (WP:COI). If you have a close tie to a company, chances are your edits won't be all the neutral, and will end up being changed anyway. All of your edits have been tied to this company and its products, so you might just be in that position.
 * Notability: Wikipedia articles can be written only from information found in verifiableWP:V|, reliable sources.  This means places where the company itself has no control over what's being written, and that also have a proven track record for getting the facts straight.  Industry and trade magazines, as well as major national newspapers and magazines, are usually the best sources you can get for businesses.  Unfortunately self-published sources (which include the company's website, press releases, and anything found in a blog or on a site like Facebook) cannot be used to establish notability.  If you have sources that fit these criteria, we can probably do something about getting an article on the company again.
 * Promotional style in the writing. Anyone with an interest in a business wants it represented in the best possible light.  This enthusiasm can run you into trouble, because the types of adjectives and superlative language used can sound a lot like an ad for the company.  For example, if a reporter for the New York Times said that this is the best disk encryption product since they invented magnets, then you've got something you can use in the article, because it's got a source.  You can't simply put claims in an article without having a good source to back them up.

I suggest you contact an administrator ( is the first name I can think of, but any of them will do nicely) to see if he or she would be willing to "userfy" the article - take a copy and put it in your userspace. I'd be happy to take a look at it and offer some feedback about its chances out there in the wilds of Wikipedia. Now if you do have a conflict of interest, I suggest you instead ask the admin to userfy it to my userspace, because if it's going to make it, it needs to do so without you editing it. Doesn't mean that picking your brain isn't okay, but a business article which isn't written neutrally is much more likely to be deleted than rewritten.--otherlleft 03:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you TPW for leaving me advice, I've added the article to the user page. Probably will have to go with getting an admin to "userfy" it to you, it seems admins get rather finicky with what is considered advertising and it would be best to minimize future controversy if possible. Thanks a ton, look forward to what you have to say about the content.Floptimusprime (talk) 19:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

You got the page back
Hey, I see you got the page for GuardianEdge back (or recreated it). If you would like me to review it and offer my opinions, just let me know. I do suggest you move the page, however, since having it as your user page might not be in keeping with user page policy because it's essentially serving as an advertisement. It might not be a problem, but I suggest you go to your user page and click the "move" tab at the top, and move it to User:Floptimus Prime/Guardian Edge. The section just below the one I linked discusses user subpages in some detail. Again, please let me know if you would like any advice or assistance.--~TPW 19:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I moved the page(um or it seems that way), could you review it for any questionable material? Thanks again!!! Floptimusprime (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

One more thing, the title of the page should be "GuardianEdge" as one word, am I going to have any problems changing that later? Floptimusprime (talk) 19:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I moved the page again (first because the name I suggested misspelled your username, putting it under an unregistered name, and second to correct the company spelling). It moves the talk page by default, which isn't that big a deal in this case since all the talk is about the article anyway, but it won't alert you to new messages, so I will put a link there in case you don't automatically add pages to your watchlist when you create/edit/move them.  I will take a look at the article tomorrow to see what I think of it.  When I look at a business article I try to remove any claims that are not backed up by third-party sources, because business articles often get very close scrutiny, and unsourced claims often lead to labeling the article as spam and sending it back to Deletionville.--~TPW 20:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC)