User talk:MWolli

Speedy deletion nomination of German Pellets


A tag has been placed on German Pellets, 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. GregJackP  Boomer!   15:27, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from German Pellets, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. GregJackP  Boomer!   15:28, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about German Pellets
Hello, MWolli,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether German Pellets should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/German Pellets.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Barney the barney barney (talk) 08:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Notability
Hi! I'm writing to kind of give you some information about notability as far as corporations and in general goes. I've got a page about notability here, but I'm going to go into some specifics about the page in general.

Now as far as spam goes, the concern right now would be that you've re-added the page multiple times after it was deleted. Stuff like that tends to set off our spam sensors since we will sometimes have people try to re-add articles that are blatantly promotional. However, I don't think that you meant to come across as promotional in tone and I think that this is just a case of you being a new editor. I made some pretty spammy sounding articles when I first started editing, so I know that it's initially hard to pick out what might make people think that you're promoting. Sometimes the problem lies with the article sounding too casual in tone or that it reads like a resume for the company, not that you're adding promotional phrases or buzz words to the article. The current version is fine as far as tone goes.

The biggest problem right now is showing that the company passes WP:CORP. To do this you'd have to show that the company has received coverage in reliable sources, such as newspapers, books, and the like. Anything that is from the company, such as their website, press releases, or anything from an affiliated person or company would be seen as a WP:PRIMARY source. Be careful about passing mentions in sources, as those would be seen more as a WP:TRIVIAL source unless the mention is in relation to something that would be incredibly notable in nature, such as the company winning a major award. (The business version of the Oscars, for instance.) Now as far as some stuff goes, be aware that the majority of awards out there don't give a huge amount of notability- especially in the business world. Most awards don't give notability in general, and that's including all of the awards.

As far as sources go, make sure that they're about the company. If the company's founder is in the news for something else and they mention the company in passing, that doesn't really count towards the company as far as notability goes. It'd give notability for the founder, but not for the company and falls under WP:NOTINHERITED. That basically means that notability isn't inherited by the company being involved with notable persons or organizations. Also, the company being successful doesn't automatically give notability either. It makes it more likely to give notability, but it isn't a guarantee.

This is just sort of the tip of the iceberg, so if any of this frustrates you, then don't feel bad. I've been on here for years and I still have things that confound me as far as editing and sourcing goes. It's pretty labyrinthine in nature, so if you have any specific questions about sources you can always check in at places such as the Reliable sources/Noticeboard. It's a good place to get some advice and info as far as sourcing goes. Oh- one final note: sources don't have to be in English to count towards notability. If you find that the only sources are in German, that's perfectly fine. Anywho, I wanted to give you a head's up as far as explanations on stuff goes. I just felt a little bad since you seemed like you're willing to fix things but didn't get any definitive answers on things. If all else fails and the article gets deleted, I'm willing to give you a copy to work on in your userspace. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:37, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think what happened is that you pulled a direct translation from the German Wikipedia page over and that some of it might have seemed promotional in tone. This is actually a pretty common occurrence, as some things might not be seen as promotional on other pages. There's also problems with terms that might not seem promotional in another language, but seem as such in another language. (Isn't language great?) In any case, I'll voice that you pulled over a copy from the German WP. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)