User talk:Plat'Home

Guys, some people here are way to trigger-happy with templates, deletions etc. In this whole process, nobody has even tried to communicate in normal, human sentences. As in, taking the time to actually write something. Is this possible? --Plat'Home (talk) 09:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we are not trigger-happy with deletions and templates. Your article and presence on Wikipedia presents a clear conflict of interest, and it is our job to resolve it. In the process, it may seem that we are inhuman, but the users of Wikipedia are just following rules and policy. LordKenTheGreat (talk) 21:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The part that I was wondering about is that everybody just assumed that the article that I put in here was biased and contained marketing language. Nobody actually checked, pointed out any questionable parts and tried to fix them if necessary.

What I've learned is that it is not possible for a company to constructively take part in the creation of an article. I mean, I sit at the source of the information, I can give any information that is requested. Instead, I get banned "pro forma" without anybody ever taking the time to prove any wrongdoing or damage to Wikipedia. The weirdest part is that while of course there are several guides with reasonable warnings about editing articles about a topic that you are directly connected with, there is no rule explicitely banning it. There is also no rule explicitely banning company names as user names (what I got banned for).

So, what is the result? Obviously Wikipedia is not interested in full disclosure. It is a simple fact that any PR dept of any company has their eyes on WP articles connected to their company and its products, it's just that edits are done by IP or by private accounts at home. So, yeah, I could have added that article with my 3000+ edits private user. Should I apologize for honesty, full disclosure and other disgressions that are considered standard in serious journalism?

The other thing I am puzzled about is that the article PacketiX VPN was speedy-deleted even though the article in the Japanese Wikipedia exists undisturbed for years. It would have been no problem for me to add more sources to prove notability, but my offer was ignored. I am well aware that most sources are only available in Japanese, but either I could have translated or somebody could have tried to get another Japanese speaker to help. If a pharaoh can be notable even though all sources are in hieroglyphs, then a software could have an article even though most information about it is in Japanese, I think... --Plat'Home (talk) 01:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:VPN[edit]

Proposed deletion of Plat'Home[edit]

The article Plat'Home has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't pass WP:NCORP.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SITH (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]