Daher Fawares

June 2008

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to XR Backup, you will be blocked from editing. – moonty (talk) (contribs) 07:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Why deletion?

One: the message I used is a standard template. I used it because you had created the article multiple times after it had been deleted. Two: I wasn't concerned with other articles that may or may not follow guidelines, frankly. The only thing to do is to examine a single page with regards to guidelines... not make justifications based on other articles that Three: I didn't delete XR Backup. I proposed it for deletion, and it has to undergo review from an administrator before it's deleted.

Hope that clears things up.

– moonty (talk) (contribs) 20:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

First, perhaps you could show me where I have had an "attitude", or been uncivil towards you, given that this is our first communication. I deleted the article because it seemed mainly designed to show the features of a product. You would need to show where this product has been written about in reliable independent publications, i.e. a magazine etc. As to Ventis BackupSuite 2008, I have doubts as to whether that product should have an article either. See WP:OTHERSTUFF for reasons why the existence of one article is not a good argument for the existence of another. Kevin (talk) 21:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

ok kevin, i didn't mean you had an attitude, it was moonty and he says it was a template so that's ok. now as for adding the article again, i wrote the reason clearly on the talk page of the article, the article was removed the first time for violation of copyright because the text matched contents on another website. so I created the page from scratch. I guess I didn't violate any copyright the 2nd time, and it was deleted for ANOTHER reason and I'm being threatened to be blocked immediately? If you really wanted to discuss the page's contents you could have at least looked at what I said explaining why I'm creating the page again, and discussed the article and told me how to change it. If it contains features why is that wrong? I didn't know wikipedia was for critics, but I can sure add many critics and the page did have a limitations section and i was gonna add some more to it when i get some time. Actually another random contributer edited the article too and changed the text that I put there, that means others seem to be interested. So answer the question now, are you against having a page about XR Backup or against the way the article was written? just be clear about that, because the first time it was deleted the reason was copyright and when i wrote it again i didn't violate that, now you're threatening me to be blocked. All i care about is that I put an effort into something the wiki moto is that its a contribution of anybody and i thought i should start and now I'm being treated this totally stupid way without anybody actually knowing what my intentions are. Dee.0x29a (talk) 18:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

kevin says:"See WP:OTHERSTUFF for reasons why the existence of one article is not a good argument for the existence of another" .. I think you're wrong and the guidelines are wrong. the existance of one article, and the existance of tons of articles on (list of backup software) is the ultimate motivation for people to add other articles in the same field. If you still can't see that, well maybe there's your problem. If XR Backup doesn't fit on wikipedia, all of the above doesn't fit either, why aren't you taking that same action? <-- I really need an asnwer to this since when i created the page, i reviewed other [approved] pages in the same category and followed the same style. Dee.0x29a (talk) 18:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)