Azupnick

Prologue Research

A tag has been placed on Prologue Research, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant 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 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Prologue Research and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. 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. Wadeperson (talk) 14:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Problems with the article

One of the problems is that sections were cut and pasted from the prologue website, which is a copyright violation. There is also a lot of what are called peacock terms, and language that is more appropriate for an ad "they focus strongly on experience, oncology clinical & medical expertise, and quality in the support of cancer drug development". --Wadeperson (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Prologue Research, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. As marketing manager of this company, you are the worst possible person to be involved with this article in any way. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Your best bet is to leave Prologue alone and concentrate on creating neutral, properly-sourced edits to the main article. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Empirically, our standard of "notable" for an article list such as you describe, is "already has an article about it which has passed muster by editors"; so, for example, a list of "Notable alumni of AlmaMater U." will generally be limited to alumni of AM U. who have articles about them here. Any editor (even an anonymous one) can tag an article as being about a non-notable subject; and this concern must then be addressed (as it was with Prologue). --Orange Mike | Talk 19:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)