User talk:Brucehauns

A tag has been placed on Caddyshack Putter, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 04:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Caddyshack Putters

There is no evidence to indicate that such a company exists, beyond a dubious-looking Web page and a myspace. Until you can provide evidence from reliable sources which indicates that such a company is in operation, the article cannot exist on Wikipedia. Thank you. FCYTravis 08:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Caddyshack Putters

A tag has been placed on Caddyshack Putters, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant 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 our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

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 (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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Xiaphias (talk) 05:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, as you did with Caddyshack Putters, you will be blocked from editing. Xiaphias (talk) 05:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Notability doesn't relate to the size of the company, but rather its prominence. The criteria are explained in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). --Xiaphias (talk) 06:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see... Are more sources needed? It seems that the company that's being disputed is a notable golf brand, most users of Wikipedia would recognize the Caddyshack brand of putters...--Brucehauns (talk) 07:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, just one source could prove sufficient justification for retaining the article. I did a Google search for "Caddyshack putters" and didn't find anything other than links to purchase the product. By comparison, a search for "Apple" turns up a Slashdot article on the first page and a New York Times article on the second. This seems to demonstrate its notability pretty solidly. Now that doesn't mean that a company needs to be as well-known as Apple to have a Wikipedia entry, but the same diagnostic criteria apply.

In short, if you can find a reliable source which mentions the company, that will help to indicate notability. A fleeting reference in a golf magazine might not be sufficient, but if the same magazine wrote an entire article about the company or its product, that would probably close the case.

Cheers! --Xiaphias (talk) 08:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Caddyshack Putters

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Caddyshack Putters, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CultureDrone (talk) 10:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]