Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wisdomsource

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 of the debate was delete. -R. fiend 14:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wisdomsource

Blatant, blatant ad. Wording seems to be tweaked just enough from their web page that it's not a speedy delete copyvio. Did I mention it was a blatant ad? No? Bunchofgrapes 03:45, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as advertising.--Alhutch 06:17, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete more empowerment. Dlyons493 Talk 07:29, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Ad. utcursch | talk 11:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as badvertising Qaz ^(talk) 05:20, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Significant revisions have been made to remove advertising content and replace with factual descriptions of company and its vision & products. Please reconsider deletion. User:Pdubuc 21:01, 10 October 2005 (PST)
  • Nice job on the wikiformatting; I appreciate the work you've put into the page. I'm sorry to say that it still smells very much like an ad, though, so my nominator's Delete opinion is unchanged. Most of the page still sounds like a press release or corporate website, not an encylopedia article. Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:00, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Hello Bunchofgrapes, I have taken another pass at the Wikipedia entry for the company, WisdomSource. Like Wikipedia, it is a story that needs to be told and Wikipedia is, I believe, the right place to tell their story. What ideas do you have to make it better? Let me know & I will implement them; and then we should be good to go. Thanks! - Paul Dubuc, MA, PMP, 604 313 4126. [User:Pdubuc|Pdubuc]] 04:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Most of the article should be eliminated or replaced with simple, straightforward facts about the products you sell and what they do. Again, simple, straightforward facts. The prose currently on the page is a searingly painful-to-read marriage of corporate-speak and new-age mumbo-jumbo. Honstly, even if you made the changes, I'm not sure that a company of 15 people (including resellers) and $1M revenues is notable enough for an article. I don't think Wikipedia is the right place to tell this story. I do appreciate the terrific effort you have put into this.Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:17, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Advertising. Gamaliel 06:18, 11 October 2005 (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.