The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 03:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC) reply
SitNGo Wizard is written like an advertisement, even though I have removed several peacock term filled sentences. It also has questionable notability as it is an obscure software product applicable to only one form of poker, and has been written entirely by one editor... DegenFarang ( talk) 17:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
If any of the "refs" had been to solid reputable sites, I would have left them.
If you haven't seen spam removed since 2007, perhaps it would be a good time to re-read some policy pages:
WP:RS,
WP:COI,
WP:OWN, and last summer's
community discussion of paid editing. The {{
review}}
and {{
uw-tdel1}}
templates might be a good idea as well.
Dori ❦ (
Talk ❖
Contribs ❖
Review) ❦ 03:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
{{
review}}
) which could be fixed, but there are no sources that cover this brand-new application.
Dori ❦ (
Talk ❖
Contribs ❖
Review) ❦ 02:02, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was delete. Jayjg (talk) 03:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC) reply
SitNGo Wizard is written like an advertisement, even though I have removed several peacock term filled sentences. It also has questionable notability as it is an obscure software product applicable to only one form of poker, and has been written entirely by one editor... DegenFarang ( talk) 17:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
If any of the "refs" had been to solid reputable sites, I would have left them.
If you haven't seen spam removed since 2007, perhaps it would be a good time to re-read some policy pages:
WP:RS,
WP:COI,
WP:OWN, and last summer's
community discussion of paid editing. The {{
review}}
and {{
uw-tdel1}}
templates might be a good idea as well.
Dori ❦ (
Talk ❖
Contribs ❖
Review) ❦ 03:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
reply
{{
review}}
) which could be fixed, but there are no sources that cover this brand-new application.
Dori ❦ (
Talk ❖
Contribs ❖
Review) ❦ 02:02, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
reply