Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get Informed
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. WjBscribe 07:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Get Informed
- – (View log)
NN article. No assertion of meeting WP:CORP. Prod tag pulled by creator. Vegaswikian 05:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: notable for reasons beyond strictly corporate activity; interesting in its own right. -Moorlock 06:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: Get Informed looks interesting and is suggested to keep. Apparently Vegaswikian's statements have no ground and are meaningless constructed with bad grammar (as always). Suggest to ignore Vegaswikian's comments. Mailcpathetsang 10:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Doesn't seem to meet WP:CORP. WP:ILIKEIT isn't a valid reason to keep either. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 11:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Let me break this down. NN means not notable, see here. Basically, this company has not been the subject of multiple non trivial secondary sources that confirm its notability or importance. Prod means proposed deletion. If no one objects to deletion, the article is deleted after five days. Because someone contested it, Vegaswikian properly took it to AFD for a vote. There was nothing ungrammatical about his post, it just contained acronyms. Perhaps you should study the terms before saying a vote should be discounted because of improper grammar, especially when this is clearly not the case. That being said, this article contains no sources and thus none of the information in the article can be verifed. If this article is to stay, it will need reliable sources to assert its notability. --Cyrus Andiron
13:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks to a 6th grade teacher for not disagreeing that the grammar appears to be a problem. Mailcpathetsang 13:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- If someone's statements tried to impress general Wikipedia users with interesting sysop jargons, then I'm afraid they have failed. Discussion is not limited to administrators and should not be presumed to be so. Mailcpathetsang 13:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure that he was not trying to impress anyone. Had he proposed the AFD in Latin, you might have an argument. The acronyms are not meant to be elitist and are clearly expalined on each page. A simple search of "nn" on the sidebar would have yielded this result at the top of the page In the Wikipedia community, nn is short for non-notable. Terms like OR, RS, and NN are thrown around quite a bit in discussions. It is generally accepted that editors are familiar with these policies before they attempt to participate in a discussion. After all on the main AfD page it clearly states: Familiarize yourself with the frequently cited guidelines WP:BIO, WP:COI, WP:CORP, WP:MUSIC, WP:FICT, WP:RS, WP:WEB, and WP:NOT. And of course, always be civil during discussions. There is no need to comment on the editor. --Cyrus Andiron 15:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure that he was not trying to impress anyone. Had he proposed the AFD in Latin, you might have an argument. The acronyms are not meant to be elitist and are clearly expalined on each page. A simple search of "nn" on the sidebar would have yielded this result at the top of the page In the Wikipedia community, nn is short for non-notable. Terms like OR, RS, and NN are thrown around quite a bit in discussions. It is generally accepted that editors are familiar with these policies before they attempt to participate in a discussion. After all on the main AfD page it clearly states: Familiarize yourself with the frequently cited guidelines WP:BIO, WP:COI, WP:CORP, WP:MUSIC, WP:FICT, WP:RS, WP:WEB, and WP:NOT. And of course, always be civil during discussions. There is no need to comment on the editor. --Cyrus Andiron
- Delete I don't see where it meets WP:CORP as well. Also, Mailcpathetsang, please be careful you do not start making attacks on other user's comments. Remember to be civil, in your comments. Wildthing61476 15:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Does not appear to meet WP:CORP criteria; WP:RS and WP:V issues exist as well. Heather 16:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete This seems to be a footnote (and not all that clear of one, at that) in an article on Nuwaubianism. Mangoe 18:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, NN company, no reliable sources. --Dhartung | Talk 23:24, 9 May 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.
