User talk:Wildtenderness

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Dear Wildtenderness: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:


 * Introduction
 * Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Frequently Asked Questions
 * How do you edit a page?
 * How do you revert to a previous version of a page?
 * What about copyrights?
 * Community Portal

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. A third option is to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator.

One last bit of advice: please sign any discussion comment with four tildes ( ~ ). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Stifle (talk) 14:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Speedy Deletion of FlowMingle Article
Recently the Wikipedia article for FlowMingle was deleted. I did not have a chance to petition for the article on its talk page. The article was marked with the db-spam tag.

A additional comment regarding the deletion of this article was sent to the admin who placed the db-spam tag. It can be viewed here User_talk:Blanchardb Please Read.

The article meets many criterion that merit inclusion, yet it was still flagged as spam. I believe the article is of encyclopedic matter and notability as described here:

NOT & Notability_(web)

Wikipedia articles should not exist only to describe the nature, appearance or services a website offers, but should describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance, which can be significantly more up-to-date than most reference sources since we can incorporate new developments and facts as they are made known.

from the deleted article

Website's achievements:

http://mashable.com/2008/11/30/dating-site/

Impact or historical significance:

FlowMingle abandons the notion of a ‘profile’ and does not use personality testing. Instead FlowMingle relies on daily group interaction and a guided introduction process in an attempt to create an inherently social and more engaging experience.

and the article is "significantly more up-to-date than most reference sources since [it] incorporate[s] new developments and facts as they are made known" (NOT)

There are several similar websites in the same sphere as FlowMinlgle that have Wikipedia articles, including: MyLoL, True.com. Spray Date, ShakeMyWorld, OkCupid, Zoosk, Match, eHarmony... The FlowMingle article was created using appropriate elements from the aforementioned Wikipedia articles as templates, and the FlowMingle article is no more suitable for the "db-spam" tag.

Regarding the "db-spam" tag, specifically "CSD G11":

Criteria_for_speedy_deletion

''Blatant advertising. Pages that exclusively promote some entity and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.''

I believe the article to be written from a neutral point of view and to not be "blatant advertising" and that it did not need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic (as referenced above with examples).

I understand the importance of keeping Wikipedia free from spam and vandalism, thank you for your diligent work. I appreciate your assistance in helping this and other articles become appropriate Wikipedia material.

Thank you for your consideration in this case

''Personal Post script: One thing that I've learned from the online dating realm is that it is full of bad behavior, spam, trite advertising, manipulation, the treating of people as commodities, never offering a genuine and sincere way to get to know someone online... online dating has a horrible reputation. Overcoming that reputation is seemingly impossible, especially considering the hurdles and barriers to entry. I am inspired though, by the reality that there is so much room for improvement; encouraged by the belief that a small person like me can step up and do something to nurture something good in humanity, treat others like real people deserving of love.'' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildtenderness (talk • contribs) 14:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please try to choose the correct selection from the message menu. You chose "other deletion", when the correct choice was "speedy deletion".
 * FlowMingle was deleted under criterion 7 (under Articles) of our criteria for speedy deletion because it appeared to be an article about which didn't indicate why it was important or significant. Please see  for details of what might show notability. If you think that these criteria are met, please explain which one and provide citations from reliable sources to back up your claim, and I will consider undeleting it.
 * You may alternatively file a deletion review request. Stifle (talk) 14:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)