User talk:Zvone138

Proposed deletion of BIARTIS


The article BIARTIS has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * PROD instead of speedy because if some of the claims can be sourced and the article can be entirely re-written as something other than a press release this might meet notability. Right now it needs sources & a full re-write.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesG5 (talk) 07:08, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of BIARTIS


The article BIARTIS has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unsourced, original research, non-encyclopedic tone (notably in the "History" section), promotional tone (claim about collectability, note about delivery perks), article appears badly translated. Web search shows possible notability but needs sourcing to prove it & a full re-write to appear less like a press release.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JamesG5 (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please address the main concerns, most importantly the lack of sourcing and promotional tone, before removing the PROD. That's not a call for immediate removal, it's designed to give time to fix the article, but it should remain until the issues are addressed. JamesG5 (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)