User talk:Crfonline

Speedy deletion of Credit Research Foundation

A tag has been placed on Credit Research Foundation, 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 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 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 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. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 15:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Credit Research Foundation

A tag has been placed on Credit Research Foundation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 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. Madcoverboy (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allowing use of CRFOnline material on Wikipedia

Please see WP:IOWN for information on how to give permission to use your material on Wikipedia. However, even if you do, it runs a good chance of being deleted as either promotional, or a recreation of deleted material, so I would also suggest recreating the article in userspace -- User:CRFOnline/CRF Sandbox, for example -- and requesting help moving it into the encyclopedia proper at the Village Pump. Good luck! --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding CRF article

Ok, the first step is to provide sourcing. One of Wikipedia's guiding principles is Verifiability: readers have to be able to see where the information came from, and that it came from WP:reliable sources. A company's website is not always considered reliable: newspapers and magazine articles are much better to cite.

While it's not a core policy, articles that don't assert Notability are liable to be speedily deleted. Make sure you say why this company deserves a Wikipedia article. "It exists" is not an assertion of notability. :-)

Good luck!--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Diana,

Since Wikipedia is NOT a directory, a "simple, generic description" of your company is not suitable for an article. I told you above what you need to do to turn it into an acceptable article. Give it a shot.

You imply that the officers of a company are reliable sources for information about it: see Enron for a counter-example.

Again, good luck!--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]