Talk:Global Reinsurance

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Am in the process of creating this page. Please do not delete as content is still being added as we speak.

The problem is that the content seems to be no more than advertising for the magazine. It is all unsourced or self sourced. There is no impartial evidence of notability. Please note that you must not remove the speedy deletion tag Mayalld 12:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. I am trying to amend and update as requested as we speak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyboy6 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello admins. I have added all the information I need to this entry and tried my best to make it as neutral as possible. Please could you assess and inform if anything else needs to be done to remove the "spam" tag. Many thanks.

The article is still entirely self-sourced. Can you not find any references to this magazine that are not self-published? Mayalld 13:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mayalld. I work on the magazine (associate editor) so felt I was the best placed to write the entry. I cannot find any sources online that mention the magazine, other than companies that carry our articles. I can maybe attach the official BPA document which notes our subscriber numbers and locations worldwide. I did check other magazine listings extensively on Wikipedia and followed exactly the same format as they have done. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyboy6 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, you are the last person who should be creating the article! Please read WP:COI, which explains why you should never create articles about yourself or your company. Mayalld 13:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did see that but it is impracticle to have someone who knows nothing about the magazine to create an entry. I made the entry very neutral and it carries no self-publicising elements as far as I can see. The links are all valid, I am not being paid to write this and the article is simply informative, not salesy etc. I know it is not recommended to write entries with COI etc but I can see no other way of writing this valid article! Is this article going to be deleted then? If so, what can I do to ensure it is not deleted again in future? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyboy6 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why would somebody who doesn't work for you be unable to write the article? Other articles about magazines get written without the need for an "inside job". As it stands, the only reason that nobody has done so appears to be a lack of sufficient notability for somebody to care enough to write an impartial article. I accept that you have attempted to tone down the sales puff in the article (as originally written, it was obvious that it was written by an insider) to a degree. However, it remains the case that this article seeks to "get a Wikipedia page" for a magazine that nobody outside its own staff thought sufficiently notable to add, and that is NOT what Wikipedia is for.
If you want to avoid any article on your magazine getting deleted, don't write it! Sit there and hope that somebody else will write about you. Pressing on regardless of WP:COI can only result in adverse publicity for your employer. Mayalld 14:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your comments, although I feel you are being a little harsh and rude to be honest. However I appreciate that you must get sick of beginners getting it wrong. As it happens, it was a reader who suggested that we make a wikipedia page. If I was to get back to that reader and ask them to submit an article on the magazine themselves, would that suffice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyboy6 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No rudeness is intended. However, as I believe you now appreciate, Wikipedia is under a constant deluge of people attempting to add non-encyclopedic content, which takes a good deal of time to undo, so as to maintain the standing of the project. Yes, it would be better if your reader submitted an article, as this would satisfy the WP:COI objection. The problem would however remain that there is a need for 3rd part verifiable sources to confirm notability. Without them, an article wouldn't stand a chance. Mayalld 15:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments and help, Mayalld. Just finally, I would like to tell the reader to include some citations in his article, as you suggest. What kind of 3rd party sources do you admins look for? What kind of source, in this case, would be accepted? For example, the editor was interviewed for a national newspaper recently and the magazine mentioned profusely. If the reader was to include that citation, would that be acceptable? Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyboy6 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The answers are covered in more detail than I could ever hope to at WP:V and WP:RS, but in general mention in a reputable national newspaper would count as a reliable source Mayalld 15:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]