Hmm.
#1 - they are apparently a registered company, with a business address and
everything.
#2 - they are selling a product (several really) to the public
#3 - they apparently do a significant amount of advertising.
One would think this makes them notable. I don't know that we have any
precedent for removing an entire company's page just because they asked for
"sole discretion over content"???
I would think it would be better perhaps to put a page up and sprotect it,
perhaps? Protect it from drive-by vandalism while leaving a verifiable
encyclopedic article?
I mean, come on. We have an article for [[Lesbian Bukkake]], I would think
the Fleshlight products/company are at least as notable as that.
Parker
On 10/6/06, Stephen Streater <sbstreater(a)mac.com> wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006, at 19:47, SPUI wrote:
Fleshlight and its representatives have contacted
us, asking that they
have sole discretion over the content of the page, because any edits
could ruin its advertising value. This is a non-notable product. The
page was created solely for promotional purposes. It is now gone.
Danny
01:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=fleshlight&btnG=Google
+Search&sa=N&tab=wn
seems "notable", verifiable, whatever. But our hands are tied by the
office shit. Any company can now contact Danny, convince him that they
are "non-notable", and get salted.
That's quite a jump in the logic there, isn't it?
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l