UMPlayer
Speedy deletion nomination of UMPlayer edit
You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
A tag has been placed on UMPlayer, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, 
. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Pianoplonkers (talk • contribs) 13:47, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
The article UMPlayer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable software product.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Cirt (talk) 14:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)what now? edit
why did you delete my entry? this makes no sense guys, we're open source developers show some love ffs
- Please see here; unless your software is notable (with proof of its notability) it does not belong on Wikipedia. If your software is good, then just wait for someone else to write an article about it in an unbiased way. Don't be offended your page has been taken off - it happens all the time. Thanks for using Wikipedia, and if you believe your block was un-necessary you may appeal it using the link in the yellow box. -Andy4789 (talk) 14:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
UMPlayer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
i dont get it, why would you block me? i'm an open source developer, my software is the product of countless of hours of work, it's the 3RD MOST DOWNLOADED MEDIA PLAYER IN THE WORLD. are you insane?!
Decline reason:
We're not saying that your player may not be notable, but that you aren't the person who should be writing about it. We don't get to write about the things we're connected to. Regards, Syrthiss (talk) 14:35, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
None of what you said in your unblock request addresses the reason for the block, which is using Wikipedia for promotion. I have seen the article you wrote, and it was indeed unambiguous promotion. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:38, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
UMPlayer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
alrighty, i get your point, you said that i'm not the person to write the article, but most articles about computer software are written by their developers since they are the most knowledgeable at the matter, i say to you sir that my article was not done in purpose of self promotion, UMP is the 3rd most popular media player in the world and no article with no ref external tags is going to make any difference, i say to you sir that the 3rd most popular media player in the world is a very notable software and deserves an article and who is not better to write about it than someone from its development team?
Decline reason:
It is clear that the sole purpose of this account is to promote a product. Furthermore, the account name violates Wikipedia's policies (WP:PRODNAME). Syrthiss' remarks below accurately summarize why you should not be writing this article. Favonian (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- I'm not going to reply to this in an administrative fashion, since I already declined above. However to answer your question - just about anybody else is better to write about it. Several reasons for this - (1) being so closely connected, you often have little objectivity with regards to your product (2) you may want to include excessive trivia that is needless to include in the article (3) you may want to include poorly sourced information that you know well but that hasn't been documented in any reliable source. Believe me, there are plenty of topics related to what I do that I want to work on but I avoid them like the plague. Syrthiss (talk) 15:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)