Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skimlinks


 * 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   keep. Speedy keep SarahStierch (talk) 07:23, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Skimlinks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Company/product that doesn't seem to meet WP:CORP and is written like an advertisement. I originally speedied as spam but author asked me to restore it. Since it's a user in good standing, I'm sending it here instead. Kafziel Complaint Department: Please take a number 15:27, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 16:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 16:30, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm the author for this page. I just wanted to clarify some points mentioned briefly above: I submitted this article in the wiki project Articles for Creation 4 weeks back. Yesterday Kafziel reviewed the submission, determined it was promotional material and deleted it. I got in touch with him as soon as I noticed and he reinstated the article, but he did so in the article space and then nominated it for deletion (instead of re-instating it in the AfC project). I've been editing Wikipedia for a few years now, but this is my first article. I knew the risks in writing an article about a company which is precisely why I submitted it through AfC with the aim of getting constructive feedback should it be denied. I'm a bit out of my depth here so would appreciate some guidance on how I can fight this deletion and either make the required changes now, or get the article back into AfC so that I can edit it there until it becomes suitable. Thank you! Juniper4589 (talk) 18:09, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to add that though the promotional content criticism may very well be valid, the one about WP:CORP is not, in my opinion. I've cited a number of very reliable and notable sources - from TechCrunch to Wired, The Atlantic, the Guardian and VentureBeat, a number of which were very in-depth coverage of the company, what it does, and why it's notable. Juniper4589 (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep - AFD is not WP:CLEANUP. The Notability of the subject is well established by the cited sources. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:07, 28 November 2013 (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.