Talk:Diskeeper Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Speedy delete: WTF?

User:Coren, why would you tag this as a speedy delete? This page is about a major software company, producers of the well-known Diskeeper software? This page also helps resolve a debate on the Diskeeper talk page, that being the relevancy of the scientology-related content on said article. The scientology stuff belongs here, because it relates to the company itself, not the Diskeeper product. If you feel that this page has no merit, then why don't you go after the Raxco Software page, an article on a similar company that has even less content than this one, even though this one was just created. — EagleOne\^Talk 02:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I don't go after any page. Since I do newpage patrol, the page that was "just created" is the one I'll see. The reason why this was tagged has nothing to do with scientology, but with the fact that while the article didn't even get anywhere near notability guidelines (which I suggest you read), it did meet CSD A7.

Now that you added a bit of meat to the article, I agree that it no longer meets criterion for speedy. It's still reads like ad copy, though, and still does not meet basic notability guidelines. If you add some reliable sources, it might begin to be an encyclopedic article.

I'm not going to bother with AfD-- you're obviously working on the article. But remember that the company making notable software isn't necessarily, itself, notable enough for an article of its own. If the only reason the company info was split from the Diskeeper article is to be able to introduce the association to Scientology, then perhaps you should ask yourself if that motivation was truly neutral. Coren 14:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

You most certainly did go after this article, especially since there are similar articles with even less meat than this one that you have not tagged. I don't give a damn about scientology either, but I do care when one of my pages is unnecessarily targeted for deletion by overeager admins.

Exactly how does this article read like an "ad copy"? That doesn't make sense. Usually marketing material contains some positive phrases about the company; there are none in this article.

Let me make my stance on the scientology aspect perfectly clear: I have no feelings toward that religion, one way or the other. I simply created this article to resolve a debate on the Diskeeper talk page, NOT to introduce an association with the rligion. The scientology content was pulled from an earlier edit of the Diskeeper article. I didn't create the content myself, just copy and paste. The scientology aspect is notable, but it relates more to the company than the product, thus the creation of this page. As for the reliable sources comment: did you see the Notes section? — EagleOne\^Talk 17:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] since I am not the author

I can and do remove the speedy tag, which I think is unreasonable altogether. Of course, anyone who thinks otherwise and wants to pursue the matter can and should take the discussion to AfDDGG 03:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I agree with your actions. --Gtcaz 02:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)