Talk:Rantic/Archive 1

AfD

Per this article's AfD, all trace of this "company"'s activity done for the sole purpose of creating its own awareness (aggrandizement) has been removed. Editors, per WP:NOTPROMOTION and WP:NOTWEBHOST, et al., please do not reintroduce any data that does not specifically answer to what services/products/etc. this group provides as a "company". —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 21:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Watson hoax

Just to go on record, here, I for one am not at all fond of mentioning this. At all. Its entire purpose was to get Rantic press. So, Wikipedia's going to jump in? —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 02:44, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The entire article was written by a self-declared representative of Rantic, and I wouldn't trust a single word of what's written without personally checking the references. It deserves at least a thorough rewrite to get rid of all the subtle falsehoods, unsubstantiated claims, self-aggrandizements and so on. Huon (talk) 22:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely. It should be noted that there is a massive difference between a hoax and self-promotion. For example, it was noted within this article's AfD that the Seigenthaler hoax has an article; that was a true hoax, intended to damage the character of the article's subject rather than to promote the editor(s) or a company—though that information eventually became public. "Rantic" is not a hoaxer. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 00:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I would also like to remind anyone who has worked or will work on this article that Wikipedia and its articles can be edited by anyone, and we are all encouraged to be bold. If Rantic sticks around a while and continues to make a trusted name for itself by virtue of the services it provides, its article would necessarily continue to improve and, therefore, the encyclopedia would as well. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 05:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)