User talk:Hellobrandstorm

Checon deletion
I have read your email and will respond herewith.

"I made efforts to include references from third-party sites that discuss the Checon company." The five references you gave did include third-party sites, but these sites do not meet the threshold of independent coverage required under the notability guidelines. is a press release from a company sponsoring Checon and is a third-party site only in name, for the content is straight from Checon's press release. For a company to be notable, we require references from third-party sources that are totally independent from the subject, i.e., not influenced by or benefiting from the company in any way.

"The article is not selling a product. It is providing a historical background of an American-based manufacturer." I find it hard to believe you could say the preceding spiel with a straight face. Then again, you never claimed to be writing a neutral article so I probably should have been less incredulous in the last sentence. Unfortunately, I hereby tell you that Wikipedia requires all articles to be written in a neutral tone. For what "neutral" constitutes see WP:NPOV. Suffice it to say your prose was nowhere near neutral, nor did it seem even remotely possible to make it neutral. Being unsalvagably non-neutral was already sufficient cause to condemn your article to immediate deletion (per this criteria).

If you want to write an article on Checon, go read the notability guidelines for companies thoroughly, ten times or more is recommended. Then gather any independent, third-party sources you have, excluding press releases and anything which consists solely of pronouncements or utterances verbatim from anyone in the company. Lastly, don't bother to clear your article draft with your marketing department. Each minute your text gets scanned by them the chances that it gets deleted here increases by 500% - I'm only half-joking here. Thank you for reading. Pegasus &laquo;C&brvbar;T&raquo; 03:31, 18 November 2008 (UTC)