Talk:Shpoonkle

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 June 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Please let me what areas need to be rectified so as to adhere to Wikipedia Guidelines? The page had been approved and now this was marked.

Any help would be appreciated?

Thank you— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fierceenigma (talk • contribs) — Fierceenigma (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

For starters, there is no such thing as "approved": all articles here are works-in-progress, subject to ongoing scrutiny. That said: the article is full of quotes from the subject's founder and his press releases, notoriously not reliable sources. The tone is promotional and conversational, not straightforward and encyclopedic. It reeks of advertisement and marketing. The "citations" are mal-formed and do not work properly. That will do for starters. By the way:

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button

located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me what the neutrality tags now added on this article means? I complained that someone ( a wikipedia editor) was being unbiased as he knew Robert personally and now this article is being slammed with comments? The person who posted the initial issues with the site is the person who is not neutral. The Wikipedia had gone through the initial stages with no issue (that's what I meant by "approved" until this person who is using this medium to harass the person who owns Shpoonkle. The tone of the article talks about the controversy and is objective in tone. The quotes are from varying publications that discuss Shpoonkle and its impact and place in the legal system and lawyers. Please let me know how to correct the citation that is within guidelines. fierceenigma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fierceenigma (talk • contribs) 18:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citations are to be formed according to the guidelines at WP:CITE. Press releases and the subject's own words in press interviews are not going to be impartial, as their goal is to sell the subject - thus, we discourage reliance on such self-published sources, in favor of impartial analysis by more reliable sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've just reverted edits of yours which turned Niznik's words into words from the WSJ or into article text. This is even less acceptable than the prior version, which at least had the virtue of attributing Niznik's statements to Niznik. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are reverting my changes mid edit - I am new to WIKIPEDIA and I am trying to comply with the guidelines. You told me I could not quote Rob - so I took that out and was redoing content and your reverting it as I am doing it. Please at least give me a chance to save content before you revert it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fierceenigma (talk • contribs) 19:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your attempts to assist me and please understand I am not trying to do anything but comply with WIKIPEDIA guidelines but your edits and remarks are not coming across as unbiased. I filed a complaint against one user as his motivation was NOT based on guidelines but being dropped off Robert's Facebook Page. The page has been up for quite some time and it wasn't until this user did this that the page has been hit with non stop warnings, revisions, and scrutiny. I am trying to my best to make the entry comply in nature and tone but I want to make sure my efforts are not in vain if you have already opted to remove this article despite what changes I make. Sitting at the computer and reverting changes as I am making them is not giving me a fair chance to fix the issues you have noted. Also, please note this is a free site trying to promote advocacy to help people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fierceenigma (talk • contribs) 19:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]