Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rocket Mobile
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Delete, with lots of thanks, however, to William Pietri for his kind and patient explanations to the author :) --JoanneB 00:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Questionable notability of company ... also advert DavidHumphreys SPEAK TO MEABOUT THE THINGS I MESSED UP 19:10, 3 November 2024 UTC [refresh]
- Keep Forgive me for my lack of understanding as I'm new. But since yesterday when I registered I've been trying to expand the pages of locales. Mainly Los Gatos, Since I'm from that area. I didnt know what Rocket Mobile was and decided to add an explanation to the company after I did some research. Now I cannot defend its notability, but for anyone else venturing to find out what the company basically does then I find the page helpful. Mike24 02:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Mike. You shouldn't take this personally. We get a lot of corporate spam, so people can be a little brusque about these things. Articles about companies should generally meet the WP:CORP standard. This one doesn't seem to. If you think it could, you have a few days to improve the article. If not, don't sweat it. On Wikipedia, the best way is to learn by doing, and I'm glad that you're being WP:BOLD. William Pietri 04:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, thank you for the explanation. I'm not going to try and improve the page at this time, I still am trying to learn all the rules for the site so I feel it best not to try and patch anything up without knowing exactly what I'm doing. Thanks for the explanation, it makes it a bit less confusing. --Mike24 05:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Understood. If you want, as the author you can request speedy deletion, which would make this process moot. Also, I should mention that one of Wikipedia's five pillars is that we don't really have firm rules; it's more about a joint effort to figure out the best way to make an encyclopedia. Still, people have already done a lot of figuring already, and you bumped into a bit of that today. Don't let that discourage you! If you end up with more questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. William Pietri 05:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks for your help. I was mighty confused when I came back only a minute after making the page seeing it was up for deletion. If I have any questions I'll be sure to ask! --Mike24 06:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow. That was quite literally one minute from first save to AfD. Nominiator, you should consider rereading the section on before nominating an AfD. In my opinion, AfD is mainly for contested deletions. This should have been preceeded by enough research to be sure the the article was a hopeless case, some discussion with the author, and a proposed deletion. I hope you fit a lot of research in 60 seconds, but you left the rest out. The author's contribution history makes clear he's a well-meaning new editor, and we should strive to not bite the newcomers. William Pietri 14:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks for your help. I was mighty confused when I came back only a minute after making the page seeing it was up for deletion. If I have any questions I'll be sure to ask! --Mike24 06:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Understood. If you want, as the author you can request speedy deletion, which would make this process moot. Also, I should mention that one of Wikipedia's five pillars is that we don't really have firm rules; it's more about a joint effort to figure out the best way to make an encyclopedia. Still, people have already done a lot of figuring already, and you bumped into a bit of that today. Don't let that discourage you! If you end up with more questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. William Pietri 05:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, thank you for the explanation. I'm not going to try and improve the page at this time, I still am trying to learn all the rules for the site so I feel it best not to try and patch anything up without knowing exactly what I'm doing. Thanks for the explanation, it makes it a bit less confusing. --Mike24 05:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Mike. You shouldn't take this personally. We get a lot of corporate spam, so people can be a little brusque about these things. Articles about companies should generally meet the WP:CORP standard. This one doesn't seem to. If you think it could, you have a few days to improve the article. If not, don't sweat it. On Wikipedia, the best way is to learn by doing, and I'm glad that you're being WP:BOLD. William Pietri 04:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No assertion of notability. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom WP:CORP -- Librarianofages 01:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into Qualcomm. Green caterpillar 01:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Qualcomm.Delete. Not notable on its own. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 02:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]- Delete unless article improves to meet WP:CORP. They make software for a Qualcomm platform but are otherwise unrelated, so a merge is inappropriate. William Pietri 04:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless notability can be demonstrated. Just because it's a company does not give it automatic entry into Wikipedia ... unless it complies with WP:CORP -- Alias Flood 04:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete; WP:CORP Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:CORP — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 06:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, It's just like an advertisement. *~Daniel~* 06:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, WP:CORP Crazynas t 20:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but if not modified and added to within the next month or so, delete. Kitia 20:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:CORP Treebark 22:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per all like-minded above. SM247My Talk 22:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.