Misplaced Pages

Talk:UE Boom: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:39, 2 April 2014 editDmatteng (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,003 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 14:52, 7 April 2014 edit undoThe Banner (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers124,620 edits →AdvertisingNext edit →
(6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{oldafdfull| date = 23 March 2014 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = UE Boom }}

{{WikiProjectBannerShell| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|
{{WikiProject Technology}} {{WikiProject Technology}}
{{WikiProject Brands}} {{WikiProject Brands}}
}} }}

== Advertising ==

This article reads as a plain promo article about some set of speakers with overly detailed information. With the author massively waving with policies and canvassing all around, I have severe doubt that the author is truly independent and not an involved but undeclared employee. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 13:06, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion the advertising tag should be removed per consensus at the AfD that the article is not promotional. ] (]) 22:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
:The opinions are ''does sound somewhat promotional'' and ''the article is not so blatantly promotional as to be considered unsalvageable''. That means that they think the article '''is''' promotional but when you deliver an effort it can be saved. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 01:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)<small>
:: The editor ] has nominated this article for deletion, was blocked for disruptive editing with his appeal denied in a largely unrelated incident (though I have commented on his noted incivility during his block discussion); and he has expressed no interest in improving the article. </small> ] (]) 14:22, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
:::There was no incivility from my side, you just don't want to hear criticism on your spammy article. Plus a lot of canvassing and personal attacks. Please stop with that. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">]&nbsp;]</span> 14:52, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:52, 7 April 2014

Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 23 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconTechnology
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology
WikiProject iconBrands
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Advertising

This article reads as a plain promo article about some set of speakers with overly detailed information. With the author massively waving with policies and canvassing all around, I have severe doubt that the author is truly independent and not an involved but undeclared employee. The Banner talk 13:06, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion the advertising tag should be removed per consensus at the AfD that the article is not promotional. Dmatteng (talk) 22:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

The opinions are does sound somewhat promotional and the article is not so blatantly promotional as to be considered unsalvageable. That means that they think the article is promotional but when you deliver an effort it can be saved. The Banner talk 01:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
The editor user:The Banner has nominated this article for deletion, was blocked for disruptive editing with his appeal denied in a largely unrelated incident (though I have commented on his noted incivility during his block discussion); and he has expressed no interest in improving the article. Dmatteng (talk) 14:22, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
There was no incivility from my side, you just don't want to hear criticism on your spammy article. Plus a lot of canvassing and personal attacks. Please stop with that. The Banner talk 14:52, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Categories: