Talk:Les Graphiquants

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (your reason here) --Demetriosakadimman (talk) 15:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Demetrios and I'm the editor of a greek magazine on Graphic design called "+DESIGN" (you can see our -greek- website here: www.designmag.gr). I had the idea of helping out wikipedia by contributing a number of articles in relation to great contemporary design studios from all over the world. I understand it's a thin line between making a mention of a (currently active) studio and a "blatant" advertisement, but imho I'm walking on the right side. Since my intention is to continue contributing on this subject, I would very much appreciate any suggestions on how to do so in an acceptable way.

Take a look at this paragraph:

"At first sight, Les Graphiquants’ work seems to be interested in teh image, rather than the word, concerned with style, rather than contenet. In fact, it is very responsive to both… The grandeur of the :expression feels typically French. Les Graphiquants’ style may not build on their country’s design heritage: they are “very proud of France’s graphic history from Cassandre to Grapus” but certain :that “French design doesn’t exist any-more”. However, their visual language bears remarkable similarities to their mother tongue in its rythm and melody, vocal symphonic texture, accents and round-:bellied visual vowels…"

It seems to be advertising the topic by showing It in an overly good light. Take a look at this page for how to write in a neutral point of view: Wikipedia:Npov

Tal Brenev (talk) 15:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Tal Brenev[reply]

Thank you for your reply. BUT this is a passage from a third party publication (reference provided).

is it not like saying "you can't add a music record review in an article, because it sheds a good light on the record itself"

Admittedly I'm new at this, so I do appreciate your effort to let me know how to correct my mistakes

Demetriosakadimman (talk) 16:10, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is a passage from a third party publication, you should write something like this:

"According to (name of your reference/third party publication)..." and then write the passage in quotation marks.

Tal Brenev (talk) 16:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Tal Brenev[reply]

Point taken. I thought providing the reference in the footnotes would have been enough, but I see your point.

The question is what do we do now? Do we leave things as they are and wait for a moderator to decide what to do with an article OR do I add the quotes and lift the current status myself? (the latter doesn't seem too right...

Thanks again for taking the time to help.

Demetriosakadimman (talk) 16:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can still edit the page and make the tone neutral, and when it follows Wikipedia's criteria, the speedy deletion tag can be removed. Tal Brenev (talk) 16:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Tal Brenev[reply]