User talk:Isvana

AfD nomination of List of CEP vendors
An editor has nominated List of CEP vendors, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for List of CEP Vendors
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of CEP Vendors. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Bardcom (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of TIBCO Hawk


The article TIBCO Hawk has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable product.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. UtherSRG (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks: tried searching for "non-notable" but Wikipedia didn't have a definition (oops) nor is the complaint linked to a specific definition. So I will take a guess that some Wikipedia editors consider this entry *could* be somewhat irrelevant to readers (e.g. like mentioning a specific fern may not be interesting compared to the generic definition of fern). So I added some statistics to make the entry (more) notable. However, I would appreciate some guidance on this topic... Isvana (talk) 12:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)