User talk:Buy to let property/Buy to let property

I believe my editorial to be impartial and nor promoting any product, can you tell me where I am going wrong please?

The external link at the bottom is particularly troublesome. Besides, what's the motivation to create this page when there is already an article on Buy to let? P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 14:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

the motivation is to educate those who don't fully understand the buy to let market, the other article was only submitted a couple of hours ago, probably similar time to my original submission.

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Buy to let property/Buy to let property

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 User:Buy to let property/Buy to let property, 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 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 User:Buy to let property/Buy to let property 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. Buy to let property (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

There is already an article on this subject at Buy to let so I fear you are wasting your time. Your username is also problematic. Teapotgeorge^Talk 16:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)