User talk:Sbergner2001

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] University of Dreams edits

Hi Sbergner. Thanks for taking the time to edit Wikipedia. You seem to be fairly new here so you may not be aware of some of our standards. I mention this because your recent edits to the University of Dreams article have been rather promotional in nature. We try to write articels with a neutral tone and to concentrate on information of an encyclopedic nature. You also removed a tag at the top pointing people to a discussion about the article which specifically stated it should not be removed while the discussion was ongoing. If you wish to contest the proposed deletion you should do so [that discussion] rather than by removing the tag. I've reverted your last edit to restore the tag and the previous edits cleaning up the page. I know things can seem a bit confusing at first, especially when your first edits are to try and write a new article. You can find out more about many of our standards at our five pillars and welcome pages. If you have any questions, please leave me a message at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks -- SiobhanHansa 17:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Scott. Thanks for leaving a message on my talk page. If you wish to protest the deletion you must do so by joining the discussion at the discussion itself. Repeatedly removing the tag from the top of the page is wrecks our process.

When it comes to making changes to the article - I made several that brought it more into line with our policies and guidelines - changes which you have simply reverted. In general the article read too much like a brochure for the University (this is what people meant by advertising) and too little like a measured encyclopedic piece that considered the notable things about the company. The advertising issues can be dealt with (as I did) however there are still issues about how notable the company is. We have some guidelines here that we use to decide whether a company is appropriate for coverage on Wikipedia. This is the main issue being considered in the deletion discussion, there are varying opinions so take some time to understand those guidelines and then make a concise case at the discussion. Hope this makes sense -- SiobhanHansa 23:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Scott - please stop removing the notice about the discussion. This is highly disruptive. Voice your objections to deletion at the discussion. Thanks. SiobhanHansa 00:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Scott - You really need to stop removing the deletion debate notice from the top of the article page. If you do not you may be blocked from editing for a time, making it impossible for you to make changes to the article or add to the deletion discussion. If you need help in how to express your stance on the deletion discussion, please ask for it, but do not continue to subvert Wikipedia's processes. Such edits will be reverted. Thanks -- SiobhanHansa 00:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Siobhan--I am still looking for a legitmate reason why you don't feel this is a relevant posting on Wikipedia? I have followed the simple instructions of citing sources and being objective in the material presented. Please reference InRoads and CEA for the model I have followed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbergner2001 (talk • contribs)

Scott, if you mean my comment at the discussion for deletion - it's because, in my opinion, the company does not seem to meet our notability guidelines for organizations. In particular the mentions of UoD in the media references provided are not substantial. I only stated a weak delete because I think it's a little borderline, but given how difficult it has been to keep the article in an encyclopedic format, in my opinion, it is not worth it for Wikipedia to keep the article until the company is more notable. That's just my opinion, I do not decide. The discussion is ongoing and there are others who disagree with me. At the end of the discussion period an Admin will close the debate and determine the policy based consensus (i.e. they look at the reasons given and how they relate to our encyclopedic purpose - it's not a show of hands). If you wish to have your opinion taken into consideration you should do so on the discussion page itself as your comments elsewhere will not be taken into account when the discussion is closed. If you're not talking about that comment you'll have to be more specific, because I don't know where else I've mentioned thinking the article might not be appropriate. -- SiobhanHansa 01:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion is fair enough. I will change the posting.