User talk:Socialmedia2011/Angel.com

I'm unsure of why this page constitutes spam. It's a valid company and subsidiary of a company, MicroStrategy, that is currently listed in the Wikipedia. Can you explain the reason for deletion Driver105 15:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Dave


 * Seems to me, personally, that the article is written in such a way to be promoting their services, rather than being encyclopedic. I know that articles should not be put in Wikipedia just because WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and perhaps angel.com is notable enough to warrant an article here.  However, I also believe that Wikipedia is more about consensus than policy, so all you admins out there, if you want to keep it, by all means, keep it.  I just thought I'd bring it up because it seemed kind of questionable to me.  Useight 15:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The author of this article has a history of adding spam links to angel.com to other articles and as such has an apparent relationship with it - this presents a conflict of interest. pgillman 16:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Chiming in here as I try to get this page back up. I work for Right Source Marketing, and Angel is a client of ours. So that's definitely a conflict of interest, for full disclosure. I'm also extremely new to Wikipedia, so please feel free to call me out if I'm being an idiot or doing something wrong. I'm fully aware that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a promotional venue for our clients, but as far as everything I've read about notability indicates, Angel should meet the standards for having a Wikipedia page. I've only started that reading, and have a long list of reading on COI to do, but my first question is, is this the right place for me to be suggesting edits to the page? I've got a whole list of recent publications from places like Forbes and Information Week about Angel, which has experienced significant growth since the last time this article was live. Should I post them here?

Thanks for any and all help!

Socialmedia2011 (talk) 21:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The links sent to me by user:Socialmedia2011 are as follows:


 * 1) "An Angel Brings Voice to Twitter"
 * 2) Information Week: 9/13/2004 "Angel.com Releases Hosted IVR Suite"
 * 3) "Facebook, Twitter Posts Can Be Voice Recordings"
 * 4) "Salesforce.com Chatter Gets Smart"
 * 5) CRM Magazine "Angel Voice-Enables Social Networks"
 * 6) "Angel Unified IVR Cloud Service Gets Health Care on the Phone"
 * 7) "Dreamforce 2011: 8 New Cloud, Social, Mobile Products to See"
 * 8) "Angel Launches Multimodal IVR App" Phearson (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Reposting
I thought I'd make a few notes here about what needs to or should happen before the article is reposted. The article was deleted under WP:G11 as the deleting admins felt it was unambiguously advertorial and under WP:A7 as they didn't feel that there was a claim of notability made in the article.  Ol Yeller21 Talktome  20:57, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * So the first and most important thing that needs to be done is to establish notability. The guideline called WP:NOTABILITY outlines several ways that a subject can be considered "notable" and therefore included in Wikipedia.  WP:GNG and WP:ORG would most likely apply to this article and off the bat, the articles that you have provided satisfy WP:GNG.  So in short, those references need to be put into the article as inline citations.  You can read more about how we use citations at WP:CITE.  It's long but if you skim it, you should be able to pick the style up quickly.  Ol Yeller21  Talktome  20:57, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The trickier part will be removing any hints of advertising. For you (Socialmedia2011), you'll have to be especially careful.  I'm sure I don't have to explain why.  As you've stepped forward to declare a connection, I'm guessing you're capable of noticing weasel words and puffery.  If you ever have a sentence with either, there a good chance the whole sentence isn't worth having.  Even if the company is, "considered a leader in its field" or something to that effect, there will need to be considerable sources that suggest that.  I doubt this will be a problem for you.  Ol Yeller21  Talktome  20:57, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Requested AfC
Requested AfC on your behalf. Phearson (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC) After reading through the article, it doesn't look overly advertorial to me. I would remove the products and services section as it usually comes off as "Hey! Look what we make!". Furthermore, it's not particularly notable information. A pizza company obviously has pizzas as a product so there won't be a menu for Dominos in their article. In general, unless the product or service is particularly noteworthy (different than WP:NOTABLE) or has its own article, a mention in this article isn't warranted. A list of Angel.com's customers probably isn't noteworthy either for this case but I'm indifferent on its inclusion.  Ol Yeller21 Talktome  21:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Notes are very much appreciated! Sorry, I'm not good at navigating this and just saw this. I went ahead and edited the article--it's quite stripped down, now. It's up at User:Socialmedia2011/Angel.com. I'm going to request feedback now and then try to get it reposted--please feel free to give any more feedback, down to a word I use that is wrong.

Thanks! Socialmedia2011 (talk) 19:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)