Talk:The People's Pension
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article was tagged for speedy deletion under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion but a reviewing administrator or uninvolved experienced editor (DESiegel (talk)) declined the request on the basis that: " In September 2014 The People's Pension announced[3] that it had accepted its one millionth member. See also" is a claim of significance. This article should not be tagged again for speedy deletion under the same criterion and, unless a valid, separate speedy deletion basis exists, further attempts at deleting this article should be made via the proposed deletion process (prod) if uncontroversial, or the article taken to articles for deletion (AfD) for debate on the merits. Note: this template should be removed once the associated article has survived an AfD debate; or has been significantly changed such that further speedy deletion requests are unlikely. |
This page should not be speedy deleted because... edit
This page should not be speedily deleted because... The article relating to The People's Pension has been deleted twice before. I am a new editor and have both times requested some guidance as to what breached Wikipedia guidelines. I have received no reply. The second deletion was carried out, to the best of my knowledge, without notification or discussion. The article in its current form is devoid of anything in the main text that could be considered 'promotional' or 'advertising'. I request that the article is reviewed on its current and merit (or lack of either) and considered then. I do not see that any article merits deletion purely on the basis that it has been deleted previously. As I am not sure of the audit trail on deleted items I will happily provide the edit text of both previous articles for comparison so that a "consensus" can be reached. Thank you for your time though based on evidence to date I doubt it will do me any good--3nickg (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)