User talk:Timothy Nathan

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Timothy Nathan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Artifax, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 16:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Artifax[edit]

A tag has been placed on Artifax, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous 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 guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 16:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI conflict of interest guideline[edit]

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Artifax, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. — Athaenara ✉ 17:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Artifax[edit]

I have been asked by people using Artifax Event and studying its use on college courses to provide an article, which I did. It was speedily deleted. I see that a similar organisation Blackbaud has a much more advertorial page allowed. Why is that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy Nathan (talk • contribs) 17:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the page you mentioned is removed, i can say quite little about its content - as i read a couple of hundred new pages a day i do not memorize them all. Seeing it was tagged with a G11 template it means that the page contained an unacceptable amount of biased information used to promote an organisation or product. Even though you use a WAX argument which is not a valid reason as to why your page should stay, i can explain why the Blackbaud page is quite nice actually.

First and foremost, the Blackbaud page only states facts in a neutral point of view. For example "The company was founded in 1981, and now employs over 1,900 people, with over 22,000 customers worldwide" is simply stating verifiable information. The article makes no judgement as to whether the company is doing well, or about the quality of their products. The only flaw of the article is that it does not state references for any of the claims, but seeing the page does not promote anything this is a flaw that can be corrected (With a couple of hundred related scholar links and several million search results its safe to assume the article is notable).

In regards to your article i can only say this: In order to be on Wikipedia any subject must be notable (Specific guideline for companies), and this claim for notability must be verifiable trough reliable sources independent of the subject. Also, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should thus cover information trough in a [{WP:NPOV|neutral stance]], meaning we do not include opinions or viewpoints unless relevant to the article. If you wish a more detailed analysis of the article you are free to E-Mail me a copy. I will then check it and provide some commentary for improvement. However, keep in mind that Wikipedia is NOT a vessel for promotion. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 11:48, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was no biased information. Indeed I rather modelled it on Blackbaud because that was seen as acceptable. I agree that Wikipedia should be unbiased and this seems to me to an example of gross bias. There is an article about Blackbaud, I wrote an equally neutral article about Artifax, which is a similar organisation and it was immediately deleted. How can that be right? I do not have a copy as I wrote it directly into the Wiki editor.

Article removals on Wikipedia are two tiered - First a newpage patrol such as myself tags the article, and then an administrator evaluates the tag and decides if it should be removed, which means at least two persons agreed on the tag. Even though basing the article on an accepted article is a good way to start out, it is not a guarantee that the end result is indeed of equal quality.

There are several ways to solve this situation. The first one is to contact Anathaenara and request an explanation as to why the page was deleted - as she is the deleting admin she can still see the page (As can any other admins). If her explanation is not satisfactory you can request a deletion review, which will evaluate if the page was correctly deleted. Note that a deletion review requires the requester to make a clear case as to why the removal was incorrect.

The second option (And the one i would recommend) is to make a request for undeletion. An undeleted article will be moved to the userspace where it can be improved without risk of removal. Once the article is improved it can be moved to the main article space.Hope this help, and with kind regards, Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Timothy Nathan. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests.
Message added 17:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]