User talk:Xarquid

Percussion software
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Percussion software, and it appears to include a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Percussion software
A tag has been placed on Percussion software, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Skomorokh incite 19:58, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome back to Wikipedia. To stay in Wikipedia, an article has to be about something notable, that is, of general interest. Click on Notability for an explanation of what that means, and on Notability (organizations and companies) for more detail. Also, it must give independently verifiable sources. Articles that don't meet these requirements are likely to be deleted. Follow the links below to learn more: JohnCD (talk) 19:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To find out more about creating articles, read the Introduction and the Guide to creating your first article.
 * You should not write articles about yourself, your band, or your best friend - that's a conflict of interest.
 * Wikipedia is not an advertising service or business directory. Before writing about your own business, read Business' FAQ.
 * For experiments, please use the sandbox.

Notability of Percussion software
A tag has been placed on Percussion software requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. JohnCD (talk) 19:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I am trying to figure out why of two things:

-- Either this page is wanted to be "speedily deleted" for "copyright violations" even though WE OWN THE CONTENT and grant Wikipedia access, through reference, and other means to our content.

-- Our competitors are listed in much the same way and are not deleted. Why is this? Examples include: Interwoven, FatWire, Vignette, SDL Tridion, Open Text Corporation, DocuShare, SharePoint, Oracle Corporation, etc. ---> Why do these get to stay listed? -- Please give me some guidance here on why they are not deleted and are considered "relevant" why our page is not.

Thank you very much.

Craig Huffstetler

So I added the "the speedy deletion of this page is contested" tag tag and it was immediately deleted...one minute later. Do administrators not heed this tag or just wait one minute? Are they in this much of a frenzy to delete pages? Jeeze? I'm honestly just trying to use your service, and improve the quality of Wikipedia, but I would like some guidance on what you want so I don't have to keep redoing it and redoing it and redoing it.

I would really like some guidance on why the tag keeps getting ignored, my time can not be extended beyond 1 minute -- isn't that what the tag is supposed to do? Are you guys abusing privileges? I do not really understand what is going on. This does not seem appropriate. It seems like anyone who would want to contribute something new to this would not want to based on just user experience...
 * Someone below has given you some guidance on our criteria for inclusion, namely notability. See WP:CORP. That being said, we also have guidelines on writing about subjects that are very close to you, such as companies you work for. See WP:COI. As for the hangon tag, it looks like it was already deleted by the time you applied the tag, so essentially there was a page that consisted only of "hangon". Those other companies you mentioned are listed because they have asserted notability. – xeno  ( talk ) 20:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Creating a new article
If you wish to add a new article you should concentrate on notability. This usually means asserting why it is notable, and allowing verification of these facts by citing from reliable sources. Cites that merely refer back to the originating website are not usually acceptable, your cites need to be from third parties. Also, copying information from other sites is usually not a good idea. You may say that you own the copyright on it, but we only have your word on this and no way of verifying it. You also need to read Wikipedia policy on conflict of interest. Creating articles about your own company's products is not encouraged. Hope this helps. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

To Escape -- in Response
Well, who do you think created the article for/by Fatwire? I am pretty sure they did (and just confirmed it)? So why does it still exist? The same for Interwoven? Unless I am meant to be dishonest and just create it from home, on a different IP/username and reference people "at Percussion" (VP level in my same department -- my boss, for example, SVP of Marketing).

I just don't understand, I guess. I thought the actual company creating the article would be more credible than a third party. And being that your editors are currently bogged down (I did hit that button first, but saw that it was too high / too many at the moment...), so I just tried and obviously I can't do it.

It also appears (or I would bet my money on it) that Microsoft wrote their own article on SharePoint.

So, I'm just trying to figure out "who" we would get to do this. Obviously, we could hire a third party. But we would still be the sources our P.R. agency (or "a P.R." agency) would reference and have to get permissions from (CITE) for permission to reproduce our logo, just like FatWire, SharePoint, Interwoven...

I'm just kind of confused since FatWire and Interwoven got to produce their own and reference themselves, but we can't. That's where my main confusion kept coming from.

Sincerely,

Craig


 * Not encouraged doesn't mean not allowed. But you need to great care in being neutral.  If you have good third party cites that establish notability then there shouldn't be a problem.  The page previously got deleted probably because it appeared to be a cut'n'paste copy from your website, and Wikipedia rules are very strict about copyright violations.  It is also unlikely that text from your web site is neutral enough to avoid sounding like an advert. -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 20:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)