Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbwires


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was deleted per G11 as unambiguous advertising/promotion/spam – Athaenara ✉  12:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Barbwires

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BEFORE does not find any independent sources, no "significant coverage"; fails WP:GNG. Happy days, LindsayHello 11:27, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails GNG after checking notability. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 13:08, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

We appreciate the standards for strict rules by which content must be considered. I WANT TO SHOUT.. GOOGLE is not the only engine - AND they could be attempting to Suppress Barbwires. TRY a SEARCH on YAHOO and then try a search on BING - compared to google - it appears THEY WANT TO BURY US, and we are looking into legal advice on what is observed suppression.

NOT YOUR PROBLEM - Yes! I know. I will add the various and more complete history which brings the reason for bringing 17 years of hard work into the light of day, and I hope I can unfold that to your satisfaction here on Wikipedia and the wonderful and dedicated people who make it work so well.

thanks Eddie ZzeonBlue (talk) 21:14, 13 March 2017 (UTC)ZzeonBlue @ barbwires.com @barbwiresradio @onyourturntable and the ever odd Mr. Mark Baker of ESCN.COM, our hosting affiliate.

ZzeonBlue (talk) 21:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC)Zzeonblue has completed several new additions and will continue tomorrow with additional references to external content, timeline events, and other areas which contribute to a notability of merit. thanks and please — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZzeonBlue (talk • contribs)
 * Note: The above comment was originally signed, but was in fact made by . — swpb T 14:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. I can't find anything on Yahoo or Bing that comes any closer to demonstrating WP:GNG than what can be found with Google, and the suggestion of purposeful "suppression" of this little enterprise by Google is not worthy of consideration. The amount of time or effort put into a project, and the nobility of its aims, are irrelevant to whether it merits an encyclopedia article – the only thing that matters is external recognition through significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. That has not been demonstrated here, and it appears unlikely that it can be demonstrated. — swpb T 13:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm also extremely disturbed by this edit, which appears to be the article creator's attempt at impersonating another editor in order to sway the course of discussion. We have no tolerance for that sort of behavior. — swpb T 13:42, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

This is ZzeonBlue and the previous edit was a mistake and misunderstanding of the cut and paste which seems to work so well within the context of this 'space' - actually too well. Not attempting to deceive anyone or cause any harm - just trying place an article on wikipedia. I understand the notability guidelines and am working very hard to build the external links which offer substantive evidence of our effort and work in this world of streaming. I offer "allow some time for editing as deletion should be a last resort when subject material is being developed and introduced to provide valid content. I also understand reviewers have tools and use regular processes everyday to keep Wikipedia as clean and factual as possible.  In the history of streaming, there were many players and incremental gains made, very few from the 90s exist today, and their struggle is worth discovering. As barbwires ties new agreements with EU labels and promotional groups, as it has in the past year, it will demonstrate new growth, we are documenting that growth dynamically.   ZzeonBlue (talk) 04:05, 16 March 2017 (UTC)ZzeonBlue


 * This protestation of innocence is belied by the very edit in which it was made, in which you can see removing my comments, including my delete vote, and restoring the false signature he placed on one of his earlier comments. I for one think the assumption of good faith has been thoroughly exhausted here, and I'll be pursuing a block with the next suspicious edit from this demonstrably shady account. — swpb T 13:10, 16 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Found zero sources in searches: News, newspapers. Fails GNG. Widefox ; talk 10:49, 16 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment & G6 (G7), G11 (has already been copy/paste moved) ZzeonBlue if I've understood your comments correctly, you'll want to see and follow the disclosure in the policy WP:COI. I now see it's been WP:userifyed (by copy/paste) to User:ZzeonBlue/sandbox. OK, please also see WP:CUTPASTE for why cut paste is not to be done, sorry for the learning curve. Widefox ; talk 10:49, 16 March 2017 (UTC)