User talk:Kristennetsirk

Welcome!

Hello, Kristennetsirk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Seymour Architecture, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Vipinhari || talk 15:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Seymour Architecture

A tag has been placed on Seymour Architecture requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Vipinhari || talk 15:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why your article was deleted

This is a boiler-plate reply in the first instance, because I have this conversation often. I have some more individual comments to add, but I may not get around to them tonight.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business listing directory or a vehicle for any kind of promotion. It is selective: article subjects have to be of enough general interest for an encyclopedia. The Wikipedia term for that is Notability, which is not a matter of opinion but needs to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The test is, have other people, independent of the subject, thought it significant enough to write about? More detail in Notability (organizations and companies).

Also, as an anyone-can-edit encyclopedia, Wikipedia is very vulnerable to being used for promotion and extremely sensitive to any hint of that; hence we have strong rules against editing with a conflict of interest. Articles must be written from a neutral point of view, and so people are strongly discouraged from writing about themselves or their own organizations. For more advice, read the FAQ/Organizations, in particular the sections headed:

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I promised you a more individual reply. Your note ("...existing architectural companies, such as foster and partners, use wikipedia as a platform to detail projects etc.") suggests that you think of Wikipedia as a place where people or companies come to write about themselves. You are absolutely wrong - that is what sites like Myspace, Wikicompany (no connection) and LinkedIn are for. Wikipedia is quite different.

It is a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedia. The notability test for deciding what to include has been worked out by consensus after prolonged argument, and the conflict of interest rules are necessary precisely to prevent it becoming a sort of super-Myspace and to maintain a neutral point of view.

As we know that most of our 3,000,000 articles are below the standard we would like, and many should not be here, the argument "You have an article about them, so you must have one about us" is not accepted - see What about article x? However, since you bring up Foster and Partners, you can see in the article history how it has developed. It was created in 2004 by a user named Solipsist (talk · contribs). As user accounts are anonymous, it is of course possible that Solipsist was acting for Foster, but his/her contribution history shows a reasonably prolific if irregular contributor on a variety of subjects, certainly not a single-purpose account. The more recent article history shows it still being continuously edited with small changes by a string of different editors. It is certainly not a Foster "house display piece"; in fact, it seems to me a surprisingly sparse article, being little more than a list of their projects, most of which, as they are "blue-links" in the list, which means that clicking on them will take you to an article) have also passed the notability test.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:54, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]