Our Wikipedia page has been deleted?!?

[T8KE0FF]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airwaysim

Whats going on??

[RushmoreAir]

Wikipedia thought the page was written like an ad, so it deleted it.

[Sami]

The titles are wrong, the page is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirwaySim

But please help the community and improve this Wiki page.

I do not wish to do anything as there may be a conflict of interest if I edit an article of my own project. And not very experienced with Wiki either, so I'd just screw it up anyway.

I see that a deletion tag has been added there and the article is pending deletion. For some unknown reason?


And even that some nice user, has added an "advertisement" tag to that article months ago, and checking it closer he even seems to be a user of this site (I'm disappointed in that!  instead of getting it deleted, why not improve it? geesh!).

[Sami]

Okay this is rather big bulls... now. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:AirwaySim    "This article has been opened again under a new name, thus it should be deleted."


It seems that 1 year ago someone had created a wiki-username "Airwaysim" and tried to create an article named "Airwaysim", which was deleted from Wiki quickly as it had no proper content whatsoever and was considered as an ad made by us due to the username (and to be clear it was not me or anyone of admins).

Now this administrator, or some other random wiki person (user: Mentifisto?), thinks that just having an article with similar title that HE deleted a year ago entitles him to mark another and to my knowledge a completely new article as "the same and thus being deleted". Am I missing something here? As in my mind this is very alarming, and makes me think does the wiki have any policies or checks regarding these issues. How do you even contact those people or correct this obvious mistake?

I am complete Wiki novice so please assist in this, and also help to improve the article if they don't like it (and please add also a redirect from "Airwaysim" to "AirwaySim"). Though it's well written already IMHO.. But obviously not well enough.

And please drop a comment to the 'talk' page of the article in Wiki at least to clear up the confusion if able.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/AirwaySim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:AirwaySim

[DHillMSP]

It looks like it is marked for deletion for the same reason the previous article was deleted - I think the naming issue is secondary.

They're citing reason A7:

A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organisations, web content).
An article about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.

I've lodged an objection - if they're going to use this basis to delete the article, then they'd have to clean out a lot of the articles on MMOG's.  And a fair number of those articles might also classify as "advertising" for the same reason....

[Sami]

Yes, there is a ton of articles of different "browser games" (if we're speaking with that diminishing term they seem to like!).

Though I cannot find that A7 reason anywhere in the AirwaySim article?  (are you confusing it to the speedy-deleted old one with lower-case "sim" in the title)   But as said I have no idea on that wiki actually works, so I guess you know better



--
edit: IMHO, a "browser games" is more some free flash gimmick game (ie. facebook style), and not a "serious" one like this, or let's say Travian. But for some reason some Wiki admins like to classify anything as a tiny browser game. Oh well.

[bleedfax18]

looks like it has been deleted, again 

[DHillMSP]

It has - checked into that last night while doing research on another topic.

It would seem that the biggest issue they had was a lack of "independent" reviews or other data on the site - it was mostly based on press releases (or at least, that was the "complaint" from what I could discern).  The other issues could probably be worked out.  From what I could tell it was a close call on the "voting", but for the moment, there's no longer a page on Wikipedia.

[0zlw]

Well if its been deleted can we create a new one or something like that? Or can we get an independent person to write about the game or someting?

[love_bus]

AirwaySim could easily have a wiki page, many other Browser based games do so, so why not AWS?. As long as we follow the WP guidelines, i don't see why not. I don't know what was in the previous wiki, but as long as its unbiased and straight to the point (not a blatant advertisement), i dont see why not. With as many deletions as its had, it will definetly be up for scrutiny. I can help work on it, if anyone wants some help lets communicate on the topic via the talk page.

[Jake43]

AirwaySim could easily have a wiki page, many other Browser based games do so, so why not AWS?. As long as we follow the WP guidelines, i don't see why not. I don't know what was in the previous wiki, but as long as its unbiased and straight to the point (not a blatant advertisement), i dont see why not. With as many deletions as its had, it will definetly be up for scrutiny. I can help work on it, if anyone wants some help lets communicate on the topic via the talk page.

I would be willing to put some time in. I am not the best at html coding (I am very basic at best) but I can sure as heck write well.