If you're reading this, it's probably because I deleted your page as part of thespeedy deletion process and you came by my user page or talk page to leave me a message and ask why I deleted your page.

First let me assure you that while I was indeed the one who sent your hard work to the digital dustbin, the deletion was done in line with established practice as one of the many tasks I perform as anadministrator. The deletion had nothing to do with whether or not I liked your article--simply put, if it wasn't me who pushed the button, it would have beensomeone else.

That being said, you came here looking for answers, so let's see if I can't help you out!

Articles are constantly being created and deleted on Wikipedia; this is one of the great things about working on a living encyclopedia and serves to illustrate of the power of collaboration. Although it is a user-generated encyclopedia, Wikipedia has established standards for inclusion that have grown out of ourcore principles, and the speedy deletion process was implemented to handle those articles that clearly do not belong. More specifically, the process involves two stages: unsuitable articles are first reviewed and tagged by anuninvolved editor, and the tag is then reviewed by an uninvolved administrator. If the tag is inappropriate, the administrator removes it. If the tag is appropriate, the administrator deletes the article. Simple, right?

Basically, there are four major reasons that a new article would be tagged and deleted: it isnon-encyclopedic, it is acopyright violation, it is anadvertisement or spam, or it is anattack page or other form of vandalism.

The most basic standard for inclusion in Wikipedia isnotability--that is, whether or not the subject has received attention from the press. Wikipedia is not a place toestablish one's notability, and so things like the band you started with your friends, the shop down the street that sells good donuts, or the awesomeness of your best friend don't belong in Wikipedia unless they've been written about elsewhere.

If your subjecthas been written about elsewhere, you have to saywhy. Creating an article that just says "Paul is a really good cook" doesn't provide a starting point for other editors to build on. Who is Paul? What kind of food does he cook? Who says he's good? How do we find out more about him? Now, an article that says "Paul Prudhomme is a world-class cajun chef who hosts the showPaul Prudhomme's Always Cooking! onPBS"...that gives you something to sink your teeth into!

And finally, articles which just can't become articles--articles with random text or no content (I suggest using the{{inuse}} template in the future)--get cleaned up here as well.

Sadly, all the notability in the world can't save a copyright violation. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, and as such we must use free content (with acouple of fair-use exceptions). If you copied most or all of your article from another website, chances are it's going to be deleted. After all, with ahandful ofexceptions that text is copyrighted by the website you took it from, and its unauthorized use can land Wikipedia in a heap of trouble. You can write an article using the website as asource--but pure copying is a big no-no.

Wikipedia is not an advertising service, and the community is very sensitive to being treated as one. If you wrote an article that reads likeadvertising copy--if it extolls the virtues of your product, usesmarketing terms like "dynamic" and "capable" to describe your company, boasts about how your website is the fastest growing ceramic-troll related forum on the internet--it's probably going to get deleted.

Surprisingly enough, this includes companies you may not be associated with. An overenthusiastic analysis of a company by a genuine fan can be mistaken for something drafted by that company's marketing department (after all,it's not that difficult to fake). If this is the case, then you simply need to tone it down next time.

And finally, this criteria doesn't just apply to companies alone--articles about products, bands, schools, and even individuals that are created (or seem to have been created) primarily to promote their subject fall into this category as well.

Writing an article saying "Becky is great" is one thing. Writing an article comparing her ass to a bowl of week-oldclam chowder is another. Wikipedia does not toleratepersonal attacks of any kind, be they against editors online or people you know offline. While it's only natural to want to blow off steam every now and then, Wikipedia is simply not your punching bag, and the same goes for pages created to vandalize or otherwise disrupt the project.

If you think you can write a new article so that it satisfies all of the requirements above, go for it! Just be sure that you're putting something different up--simply reposting the same unsuitable content over and over again is probably not agoodidea.

If you want your original article back to work on, feel free to leave a polite note on mytalk page and I'll be glad to help you out if I can (i.e. I'd gladly provide a page deleted because notability was not established, but I'm not so willing to provide copies of attack pages or pure copyright violations). If I decline your request and youbelieve your article was deleted against procedure, you can list it for review atWikipedia deletion review, although your time and energy would more likely be better spent writing a new and improved version.

I hope this helped answer some of your questions. If you're still confused or want to leave a comment, feel free to leave me a message byclicking here. Be sure to sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) so I know who you are!