User talk:APrb

A tag has been placed on Airpatrol corporation, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Citrusbowler (talk) (contribs) (email me) 18:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on AirPatrol Corporation, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Dewritech (talk) 16:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! I see that you've created an article here, and by now I'm sure you've noticed that it was nominated for deletion, because one of our editors had concerns that it was too promotional. I declined the request for speedy deletion, so you don't have to worry about it being immediately deleted. However, I would strongly encourage you to take some time to learn about our policies for articles, because I feel that the article still has some issues. I deleted the products section of the article because it was not very encyclopedic, and I believe that it was the dominant contributor to making the article seem promotional. Here are some links to policies that you should take a look at when you get the chance. There are some on keeping a neutral point of view, conflict of interest (if you are editing on behalf of the company), and notability. The last one, about notability, is one that I would urge you to look at as soon as you can, because that is where the article still needs work. You need independent, third-party sources for the article that can establish a claim of notability, which is one of the key criteria for an article to be on Wikipedia. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. You can reach me at my talk page.--Slon02 (talk) 01:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree the article can still be improved, and I assure you that several days were spent on this making it as neutral as possible and that all the articles on making your first article were thoroughly read. What would be the best way to improve the article? AirPatrol Corporation is a flourishing and quickly expanding small business that deserves to be noted on WikiPedia.

Well, first of all, the main problem with the article now is notability. That is addressed in the general and corporation-specific notability guidelines. Basically, the way to show that a subject is notable is using reliable, third-party sources that demonstrate significant coverage of the topic. I understand that I removed some sources during my promotional-content purge of the article, but you can go to the article's history (it's a button at the top of the article next to "edit this page"), and from there click on the time stamps of revisions to see what the article was like at that time. Everything that you added to the article before is still there, in its history. So, if you can demonstrate the notability of the topic through reliable sources, please do so- and that's currently the most important thing you can do for that article.--Slon02 (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AirPatrol Corporation is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AirPatrol Corporation until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dewritech (talk) 13:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AirPatrol Corporation is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AirPatrol Corporation (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 04:55, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:AirPatrol Corporation (logo).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:07, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]