Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surplus business

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 as spam. Sam Vimes | Address me 10:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Surplus business

It is an Advertisement masquerading as an article, the author has been spamming the PLC article with this same stuff, similar names to Radwell have been banned such as Radwell International -Crunchy Numbers 03:10, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - SPAM. Yeah here's the debate for an article from the same guy which was deleted a few days ago, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radwell International. It was very similar, used the same pics and everything. -IceCreamAntisocial 03:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Per nom as WP:SPAM Also need to get rid of the free advertizing here. JungleCat talk/contrib 07:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Change to Neutral pending the outcome of affected articles to be "cleaned" JungleCat talk/contrib 14:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Dlyons493 Talk 07:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Maybe user Brian Radwell can explain some of the spam going around. Just like a Monty Python bad dream, its everywhere. See this user's contribs. JungleCat talk/contrib 07:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Nigel ^(Talk) 10:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• The surplus business is the business of a surplus store, amongst others. Uncle G 12:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment the information about ebay is not spam. they indeed trade (among other things) surplus goods. otherwise article not really clear, looks a lot spam-style User:Yy-bo 14:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Hello, I am the second contributor to this article. I contributed what I thought was a lot of objective, informatiive, factual information to an article that already existed before I added to it. It was very vague, and I tried to expand on it. All of the links I added were from/to companies and articles directly related to the industrial "surplus business". I am in fact employed by Radwell International, so I want to be very honest here. I added one line mentioning Radwell, and would gladly strip it out since I now see that the spam policy is understandibly very rigid. Addionally, I can add more content about other examples -- commercial and consumer venues -- relating to the topic since I have done a lot of research on the surplus topic, work in the field and have quite a bit of knowlege that readers can learn from. If there are no votes to let the article stand, then the jury has spoken and all is fair. Thanks for reading my explanation. I am a new user, and I would be glad to elaborate further if you'd like. -Brian Radwell 2:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Possible Resolution - The direction this AfD was going, my best bet on the outcome would be: 1.) Not only delete, but 2.) Further action such as a noticeboard report, with all the bells and whistles due for the WP:SPAM. I reported this to an admin recently as I did not want this to end up with permanent blocks, etc (but I was willing to take this further). I want to assume good faith here. Brian Radwell, you help us clean up the articles affected? I believe you are here in good faith as you are participating in this. Therefore, lets work together and clean this up. If you have any questions, I might be able to help, but I am no expert on editing, trust me. I believe your response will have an impact on the closing admin's decision here. JungleCat talk/contrib 03:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - I will clean this up asap and then request a review of my changes. I appreciate JungleCat input here and follow the advice. In good faith, Brian Radwell 9:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• This article seems to present useful information, although I'd lose the links to Brian's own firm. I don't quite see the relevance of the hand held scanner image to the article but this seems a good faith effort to have an article on a topic. It needs cleanup, but Keep. I would ask those suggesting delete to relate where this material can be found instead, because the material is encyclopedic in my view. ++Lar: t/c 17:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - "Radwell" has been stripped in the text body. I have kept the link to the Radwell URL as an article Source... I believe Wiki policy allows for a link to a Source? It appears I've had some cleanup help from the Wiki patrol; much appreciated . Thank you admins and users for your feedback. Brian Radwell 11:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Looking into the history of this page I see that the post from "Brian Radwell" 11:30, 8 Sept 2006, was added by 12.107.75.162. After looking at the edits from that ip I see that at the same time he is "thanking" us for deleting his spam he has been adding it back anonymously to some of the same articles he defaced in the first place. This person has admitted that Brian Radwell isn't his name and is actually the name of the owner of the company.-Crunchy Numbers 16:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - "I added NO spam at the same time I was thanking anyone for assisting me since JungleCat offered assistance and guided me as to how to remedy this situation. It is an incorrect statement to say I was spamming at the same time or since Junglecat post. The entire post by Crunchy Numbers is not factual. Additionally, I have never said my name is Brian Radwell, and it is not. Brian Radwell is the President/CEO of the company, not me. I have not breeched my integrity in any post. I have to say that this is a real drag on adding anything of substance to this site. .-Crunchy Numbers 16:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC) needs to look at history more carefully. Brian Radwell 3:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC).
  • Note to closing Admin I am surprised this AfD is still open. I have gone through (a while back) and removed some of the spam links as of these edits:[1][2][3][4].I have warned the anonymous user who was adding Brian Radwell’s sig to talk to stop as this is in violation of Wikipedia policy here. Brian Radwell has since then only added possible copyvio photo as this. That is it. My patience has been worn out. The registered user Brian Radwell, not the anonymous sock, needed to clear this up, but instead Brian was the sock. Very confusing. What a waste of time, etc. etc. I just wish I would have gone straight to WP:ANI from get-go. Strong Delete this as a violation of WP:SPAM. JungleCat talk/contrib 02:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

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.