User talk:Amart79196

Question for administrator

{{adminhelp}} I have a few questions about a recent article that was deleted. Here was the reason: 21:47, 10 February 2010 Jclemens (talk | contribs) deleted "ReactiveMicro.com" ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable computer company.) We feel this was done in error quite possibly due to the lack of knowledge of the person deleting the article. The Reactive company is the largest computer company for the vintage market of Apple][ products. Quite possibly the editor who deleted the article might have been lacking knowledge of how this is the largest site that develops most of the new innovations for this vintage market. Without divulging the yearly income from the site, it is safe to say that this company is by far the MOST notable computer company for this vintage market. We are not sure what the difference is between this market and other vintage marketplaces.

If you feel that my reasoning is not correct and feel that having it remain in the deleted state is correct, we respect your opinion although we along with many will disagree. If this is so, would we be able--at the very least get a copy of the last version of the article so that we can put the article directly on reactivemicro.com and its affiliates sites. That way it wouldn't be on any of Wiki at all and we would have our article information back for all to read and enjoy.

Thanks for your help in advance.

--Amart79196 (talk) 08:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

As the article ReactiveMicro.com was deleted under the Proposed deletion process, it is automatically restored on request. It may still be nominated for deletion under the Articles for deletion process; I will notify user MBisanz (talk · contribs), who made the proposal, in case he wishes to do that. That would start a debate, normally lasting seven days, to which any user can contribute; after that an administrator will decide what to do, based on the arguments put forward, not on the number of voices.

The reason advanced for the proposed deletion was "Non-notable company". As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia does not expect to have articles about every person, company, band, etc; the test 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." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and press releases. More detail at WP:Notability (organizations and companies); you may also find the WP:FAQ/Organizations helpful. If you wish the article to be kept, what you should do is add independent references. This way of doing things means that Wikipedia editors (who are all volunteers on the same footing as yourself) do not need to make their own judgements about which subjects are significant; they simply ask, have other people, independent of the subject, thought it interesting and important enough to write about?

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)