Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fifth Dimension Computing
Self-promotion (User:Vaelor). Not notable--10 hits[1]. Niteowlneils 20:55, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: Not a significant or notable company at this point, and its enterprises make me a little nervous. Geogre 01:40, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Okay, so I'm new here - humor me: Show me where it states in the deletion policy that an article should be deleted automatically because the author is directly affiliated with the subject of the article? If by self-promotion you mean vanity page, I don't see that it meets any of the criteria of a vanity page whatsoever. It's not highly opinionative/POV, it's not poorly written, it interacts with other articles, and it has informative/interesting merit, albeit currently only to residents of a small geographic area plus a fairly niche selection of internet users. From Wikipedia:Vanity_page: "A page should not be cast away as "vanity" simply because it may have been authored by its subject, or because the subject is unfamous." Keep, unless/until somebody can show me a Wikipedia policy specifically saying why it shouldn't be? -- Vaelor 15:45, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- [Edit] Oh, and "its enterprises make me a little nervous" - isn't this tantamount to saying "delete because I don't like the sound of it"?? I don't recall seeing "articles on topics that may make some people uncomfortable" in the deletion policy either, must be my bad... -- Vaelor 15:51, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Comment: No. What it amounts to, if I'm going to be honest, is that your writing seemed nebulous and diffuse, as if it were obscuring its object. I was suspicious that the activities were MLM or mass-e-mailing. Both of those activities would have made the article a deletion candidate for being promotion of illegal activities in some jurisdictions. As for the real reason for deletion, though, it is exactly as stated in the nomination: self-promotion. No advertising. My rationale was intended to be in addition to that, not instead of. Geogre 18:49, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- #18 on Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not--doesn't sound like a "major corporation". Principle expressed at Wikipedia:Auto-biography seems to apply. Nor does it seem to be a "household name" as cited at Wikipedia:What's_in,_what's_out#Companies. Wikipedia:Tutorial_(Keep_in_mind)#Subject_matter is also relevant. I doubt there is any Wikipedia article on a contemporary topic that's been kept that only gets 10 hits. Niteowlneils 02:31, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Niteowlneils - Thankyou for taking the time to point out these references. Having read these links I see now that this article seems to fall under less "do's" than "do not's" by Wikipedia policy. While this article is by no means intended to be - nor, I still firmly assert, could be classed as - vanity, self-promotion, or advertising, I see that the article does not have a broad enough scope and would be of interest to too small a niche group to merit being "Encyclopedic". Geogre - To the best of my extensive knowledge on the subject, bulk emailing is not illegal anywhere in the world, providing that the sender acts within the constraints of the US CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (and/or its various international counterparts) and that the recipients have requested the information (or have prior contact with the sender) and are not just web harvested email addresses. Hence your fears and suspicions have no bearing whatsoever on this article's candidacy for deletion. That said, of course my vote is still Keep, but is unfortunately now purely bias rather than my previous solid belief that the article was within the boundaries of Wikipedia's content policies. -- Vaelor 05:14, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Yes, the tone of the article is NPOV and suitable. With unsolicted email running about 30 to 1 against email I'm actually interested in, I strongly object to the practice. The CAN-SPAM act was seriously watered down by the time it was enacted, and invalidated stronger state measures, such as laws of Washington and California. However, neither of those issues factored into my listing (I wasn't even aware of the latter at the time). It just didn't seem to be a notable enuf subject. Niteowlneils 19:01, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Self-promotion of a non-notable company. jni 06:33, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)