User talk:Baerjamin

Hi Baerjamin, I restored the Pano Logic article (not much of one, unfortunately) in your userspace here. ~Eliz81^(C) 21:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Pano Logo logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Pano Logo logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Pano Logic deletion

The article should describe the company (its history, governance, controversy, etc), not go into detail about its products. I would suggest you read some of the articles you reference, the General Motors article is pretty good. The Pano Logic article had 2 sentences about the company and 24 about the company's products. Or see for example BAE Systems where only 1 out of 7 main sections is about the products. And no, I'm not an employee of a competitor, please assume good faith in the future. Mr.Z-man 02:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please take heart that there is no corporate conspiracy going on here, Baerjamin. Articles about smaller companies often get deleted for notability concerns. Your article as it stood was more a detailing of the products you offer rather than established why your company was notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia entry. As many many other articles before it, I second the opinion that it warranted deletion. I strongly suggest that you consider not recreating this article, as Wikipedia is not for promotion of any kind, and you (and your coauthors on the article) clearly have a conflict of interest in creating this article. ~Eliz81^(C) 02:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ok if I copy some contents onto the exisiting Pano Logic Inc? --Ramu50 (talk) 21:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pano Logic, Inc.

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Pano Logic, Inc., suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Pano Logic, Inc.. Bearian (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]