Talk:Adland/Archive 1

I've reverted to a version prior to the deletion that was done after it was deleted on svwp for lacking notability. New users that appear out of the blue and readd things that aren't true and incorrect will NOT help to keep this page. I've already explained myself in too much detail on several discussion pages for these new users on svwp, enwp and dawp and quite honestly I've grown tired of it. And for the record, Åsk is NOT a CEO since she more or less is the company in question, for more information please see Sole proprietorship. GameOn (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Honestly I'm unclear as to how you can know to verify information that is in other documented references and resources. I have no idea what SVWP is, although after a bit of googling I'm assuming you are referring to the Swedish Wikipedia. I do not see what that has to do with anything as this is the English wiki. Since you've gone through all these other wikipedias, it would seem you have a vendetta out against the postings for this site. It is also unclear to me how you would know what type of company this is and if she is the sole proprietor. Since you are so keen on correct information I suggest you prove that point before you make claims you cannot back. I see nothing posted in this article about the creator of Adland.tv being a CEO.Missadvert (talk) 23:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)missadvert

svwp is short for sv.wikipedia.org, dawp is short for da.wikipedia.org. These are not swedish wikipedia or danish wikipedia. They are wikipedia in swedish and danish. The point is that I've explained to several users, most of them involved in Adland, either herself, the man she lives with or her hosting company why I removed the things I've removed.

I'll do this one last time, then I'm just going to revert without further comments.

The part about her being a CEO was added by Bob Knorpp who earlier has had help from Åsk to create and add information about his website to wikipedia. Source for it not being a company where she can be a CEO is found link removed. As you can see the identification number for her company is the same as her national identification number so it's a sole proprietorship.

Now lets go over the "sources" one last time. You are NOT the first user that stumbles over this article and adds the same incorrect information. I've already debated this one with other users here, other users on svwp and even more new users on dawp.

Library of Congress does not use it as a reference. They have it mentioned in a list of places where information can be found, they are not using it themselves.

FastCompany has links to her site from a blog on the site, they are not using it as a reference.

Der Spiegel doesn't (Verstehen Sie deutsch?) use it as a reference. They link to it.

CNN Money doesn't even link to adland.

The Guardian doesn't use Adland as the text claims either, they mention it in passing "Nor has the advertising weblog adland, at www.ad-rag.com, which also published the image."

Mentioning that Åsk and Jane Goldman has been on two shows isn't something that makes Adland notable. And the incorrect information about Åsk being a CEO is in The Advertising Show as well so they obviosuly don't check any facts.

We do not link to external sites in the text. MarketingSherpa doesn't seem notable in itself, and I quote from Wikipedia:Notability (web), "The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization". This award is not well-known.

That Åsk has appeared on BeanCast doesn't make her site notable and shouldn't be mentioned since this article is about her blog, not about her (the article about her on svwp has also been deleted for lacking notability). Since it's clear that Åsk and Bob Knorpp have worked together to boost eachothers wikipedia articles it's even more apparent that this information can't be left.

We only use one external link normally to a webpage, two isn't required.

And top it all off I'll explain why I removed the link to marketingsherpa. It's a site where I need to pay to see if it actually says what you (and a lot of more new users) claim. Since most of the sources are used incorrectly (on three different language versions of wikipedia by several different users who are only interested in this article) I'll assume that this goes for that source as well. Yes I do NOT assume good faith since all the users act the same way and several of them can clearly be linked back to the creator of Adland.

And I do NOT have a vendetta against this site. As I've already explained on my own page since this is also mentioned by several of these new users. I do however feel that wikipedia shouldn't be used for advertising yourself or your company, it's an encyclopedia. Creating new users, or getting more outside help, will not make me back off from stopping Åsk using wikipedia as an advertising chanel. I've saved the above answers to my own page in case this talk page gets deleted once this article gets deleted since I've grown tired of answering the same questions over and over again. We have hundred of thousands of article you can participate in, do that instead of an article about yourself or someone close to you. WP:COI is a giudeline! GameOn (talk) 06:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

As a long time Adland reader, I don't understand what the issue is regarding notability. The site is the Boing Boing of the advertising community and is one of the only complete archives of Superbowl ads, and as such deserves to be documented as a cultural phenomena. Otherwise, you should delete the entry for Boing Boing - not to mention the many wikipedia articles in the advertising category that use Adland as a proper noted source. Brandonbarr (talk) 14:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Comparing with other articles will not help. This article must show that Adland is notable. As a side note I've tagged three other advertising articles that lacks notability as well recently. They, as well as this one, were created by the person behind the company/blog in question. You can help find other articles that lack in notability as well in case you are interested and thereby make sure that Wikipedia isn't used as a form of advertisement. This is after all an encyclopedia. GameOn (talk) 15:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Notability

How can we show that this site is notable if every reliable, secondary source is removed by Gameon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.72.206.187 (talk) 18:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Please add reliable sources that are about the subject at hand (not Åsk Wäppling) and use them correctly, the history of this article (and the on dawp and the one that was on svwp before deletion) is sadly filled with incorrect usage of references. GameOn (talk) 07:02, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, an in-depth interview with the founder of the website due to her role as being the founder of said website, is not relevant because it's not about the website. But then, can we make another wikipedia page about the founder of the website, or will that not be notable enough?

She started what is now Adland.tv back in April 1996. In the 16 and a half years since, she's covered every notable ad agency and marketing trend, big and small, and every major TV, print, outdoor and digital campaign worth seeing. 198.72.206.187 (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that an article on her would show her to be noteworthy, the article about her on svwp has been deleted three times. Once in 2007, then in 2008 and then in 2011. Has she done something more since the start of 2011? GameOn (talk) 07:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

An article about her doesn't show her to be noteworthy? I don't understand. What does the Swedish wikipedia have to do with this? According to Adweek she lives in the United states and I am editing the enwp. 198.72.206.187 (talk) 05:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Please explain to me why it has any impact where she lives right now, besides she's still listed as living in an apartment in Stockholm. I just wanted to show you that she has already, on numerous occasions, tried to create an article about herself on another language version of wikipedia and that article has been deleted. That should give you a hint about that could happen to an article created here. GameOn (talk) 08:38, 10 December 2012 (UTC)