User talk:Ricehoneywell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Spinnaker Sound

A tag has been placed on Spinnaker Sound, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Alasdair 08:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: deletion of Spinnaker Sound

Hi Rice, apologies your comment at my usertalk page caught me at the end of my day here, hence the slight delay in response.

I deleted that article as it had been tagged by someone else as likely satisfying the criteria for speedy deletion. Although Wikipedia has an extremely broad range of entries, not every entity or topic warrants inclusion here. There are Notability guidelines that an article or topic generally needs to satisfy else risk being deleted. When I reviewed the article I determined that there was nothing compelling to demonstrate a claim to notability, nor did a (non-comprehensive) search turn up any indications.

However, I have decided to temporarily restore the article, to give an opportunity for you to expand upon how it may meet the notability threshholds. Possibly, there are some 3rd-party sources or further information that could be provided that would change the present perception. In particular, I suggest that you take a look at these guidelines on notability inclusion for companies. Note that, "A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it."

You might also like to consider 'What Wikipedia is Not', as a further guide to how articles should be structured and what they should contain. Wikipedia is not a business-directory substitute or intended as a means to alert and direct readers towards products and services. Only those products and services that can show a significant notability and appearance in reliable, non-promotional third-party sources are candidates for inclusion.

This restoration does not mean that someone else won't come by later and consider the article for deletion. As it stands now I still think the article would fairly meet the criteria to be deleted. You'd be welcome to argue the point if it came to that, but in the end whether it stays or goes will depend on any overall consensus established (say, if someone were to nominate it for the formal deletion process.

I can make no guarantee that the article will not in the end be deleted, either by me upon reconsideration or someone else. It will depend on the content and demonstration that it meets various criteria for inclusion here. These criteria are not always clear-cut, and in general it is up to the contributors to make sure that the article's content and subject matter fall within our policies and guidelines. Hope this helps. Regards --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)