Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federated records management


 * 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 delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Federated records management

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is written about a records management system for large corporations, but is written mostly like a how-to guide or veiled advertising for a particular method or product - the article doesn't even make it completely clear which. Recommend deletion as an unencyclopedic guide and spam. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 21:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; fails WP:NOT. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 22:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and GlassCobra. --Fang Aili talk 23:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I totally agree that this article is written like a How-To guide, and because of that it violates WP:NOT. Wikipedia not says "Wikipedia articles should not include instructions, advice (legal, medical, or otherwise) or suggestions, or contain "how-to"s."--SJP 23:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or send to Wikihow Since it's how to, it doesn't belong here per WP:NOT. It'd be better for Wikihow. Yamakiri on Firefox 00:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I am the author. It is my first article and I did not intend it to read like "How To" or SPAM. I believe that the topic is of interest to a lot of people in my field, (records management and compliance). I'd be happy to re-write in a more agnostic fashion if you all agree that it would be of interest to the community. Please advise. Thanks Chapmaa 18:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I have made changes to the content to make it more agnostic and less process-focused and would appreciate feedback regarding its suitability in this format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chapmaa (talk • contribs) 21:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom, and that, while it's much better, it still violates WP:RS and WP:NOT. Send it to wikihow as suggested. Bearian 00:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not giving up ;-) I have added significant records management and federated records management references to the article. If anyone has any specific advice that might make the article more acceptable then please post. This is a topic of interest to a lot of people in the compliance industry. Chapmaa 11:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.