Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saalome Global

Add links
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 was delete. that was an eyefull to read.. SarahStierch (talk) 22:41, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saalome Global

[edit]
Saalome Global (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable corporation Orange Mike | Talk 01:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do Not Delete - Do not Delete, Saalome Global has been fully verified and article is a work in progress. Any American company that was or still is involved in oil Exploration on the Mississippian Lime formation is considered monumental as it is the largest oil exploration project in US history [off topic person comments removed] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.112.241 (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do Not Delete Saalome Global - I am Kayden and I started added somethings to this article that may not have been able to be verified by online sources. This company does list proper sources and I will make sure to wait until publish certain facts when the kansas press releases are sent online. This article involves key people in United States oil that have yet to be posted on Wikipedia. I do agree with the above opinion that the original person who asked for deletion is not a credible person and has absolutely no knowledge of American History, Entrepreneurship, as well as Wiki Standard. I will be expanding on articles of T.Boone Pickens, and Creating one for Providence Energy Corporation who is headed by Mike Allen and his son Luke Allen as well As Jeff Crook and Orange Energy Consultants. These are key players in the American Economy and are relevant to the Obama Administration as well as the Pickens Plan. I can not be expected to do an article in 2 days and so please give me time, at least a few weeks. Orange mike seems to be very harsh and like I said I believe he abuses wiki standard. I have modified the article and will resubmit it in a month when the magazine goes on line, if it does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaydenemalee (talk • contribs) 12:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
regurgitation of press releases is not "significant coverage by independent sources". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • ORANGE MIKE I have read your page and please provide a response to me on a couple things. First, what gives you the right to ask for a page deletion when I have only started working on it. Second, what makes you think that your views of deletion are to be held supior over others when I think you spend all your time looking to delete pages. What is your opion on free information distribution and if the great encyclopedias of our time with held information like you do, it would be no different than burining books like the times of old. Do you think that just because you attend a bunch of classes you can be taken seriously. Please respond to your comments as well.......* I am considered to be toward the "deletionist" end of the inclusionist-deletionist spectrum, because I believe that many articles here (including not only new ones but many existing ones) are violations of our standards: how-to guides and game manuals, fan trivia, in-universe fiction summaries, obscure porn actor biographies, politician self-aggrandisement, memorials, original essays masquerading as scholarship, etc. When I say I am a bit of a deletionist, I mean that I hold articles here to higher standards of notability, verifiability, etc. than some other editors. (And yes, our servers are overloaded, and the problem's not getting any better.) I'd rather see fewer articles, better researched and better written. I am really glad to help other editors in any way I can, though; and please don't hesitate to contact me. Also, as the person said above what gives you the credibility and knowlege to say something lack notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaydenemalee (talk • contribs) 13:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The way to avoid deletion of your article is to show that the subject has coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. See WP:CORP. I guarantee that complaining that OrangeMike is a deletionist will do absolutely no good whatsoever. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete - no third party coverage found to indicate notability. current sources are merely primary source documentation to indicate existance of company. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do Not Delete OK guys go ahead and delete this page if it really is wrong. I just spent a lot of time researching it and as far as notability, I think at least the CEO is considered notable. And I agree with Floquenbeam about complaining about Orange Mike. It is just he can not be taken seriously as an administrator because he is openly saying he tries to go outside of Wiki policy. As far a notability, at least the CEO has that. He is the CEO of at least 2 other national companies and a middle distance runner that can be proved online. How can I be expected to put all this in there in 2 days? What determines notability? I read Wiki policy before I started and was sure I followed procedure. I am sorry ok.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaydenemalee (talk • contribs) — Kaydenemalee (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Kayden, you don't seem to understand anything about how we work. My language which you quote with such indignation, is a full disclosure of my philosophical and strategic position, within the boundaries of Wikipedia policies and procedures, on the eternal debate among Wikipedians about how far we should stretch our limited resources. There is no "freedom of speech" right to use somebody else's resources to house a conglomeration of regurgitated press releases about a person and a company that might be notable someday maybe if things work out. I also note that Dustin Croghan himself wrote this article in the first place, in violation of our warnings about autobiography and conflict of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:55, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Zero references, not even a press release. It's a real corporation.[1] The website is fantastic.[2] Very odd there is no press coverage. As for Croghan, I only found a Dustin D. Croghan of Douglas County, Nebraska reported in Omaha World-Herald, May 2, 2006, age 25, $500 fine for reckless driving. Saalome Global Croghan is from Kansas, not Nebraska, so there does not appear to be any source information on CEO Dustin Croghan. The topic does not meet WP:GNG. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • comment the rhetoric on the website is grand and vague and glorious; but the fact content is pretty low (apparently they also install burglar alarms). It's a testimony, though, to how slick Premium WordPress Themes templates can look when used well. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:30, 25 October 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Saalome_Global&oldid=1138331369"