Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R.C Cosmos

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. howcheng {chat} 18:36, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] R.C Cosmos

From the previous speedy tag - advert for nn company. No opinion Delete fails google test, looks non-notable to me WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 10:34, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. non notable. --Squiddy 10:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Deletion Looks like an advert for a non-notable company. The article doesn't say that they've actually done anything notable. Without that claim, there is no way we can test their notability. GestaltG 18:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

• No Deletion I think it is a company that is trying to do something new. J0e 18:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • But not a company that has actually done anything new, i.e. non notable. Wikipedia is not engaged in speculation on what a person or company listed in an article might or might not do, or whether they will someday do anything notable. I cannot even tell from the article what it is new that they are trying to do (assuming that even mattered for this discussion, which it doesn't because they haven't done it yet) Delete. GestaltG 05:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
• No Deletion But you see its an open source art project. Not something that "they may or may not do". And the independent film company that is doing this project I think deserves to be on wiki. For the average person to find out about them and support the out, by contacting them and explaing their ideas or something eles. J0e 06:40; 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, you are a registered user, so you are an editor too. Feel free to rewrite the article into something worthwhile if you don't think it should be deleted. It's not a well written article which is part of the problem. Take the time to rewrite the article, clarify what they are doing, supposed to have done, and why they are notable. You obviously have some firsthand knowledge, and I suspect you of being either a puppet or the original author, but take all of this in stride and just fix the article if you can. Convince the Wiki community by actions why this is an article on a notable subject and not just and advertizement stuck into Wikipedia. If you can't do that, then you have no argument. GestaltG 07:04, 2 January 2006 (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.