User talk:AdeleMarieC

This is AdeleMarieC's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Martin International (January 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MarcGarver was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Martin International and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MarcGarver (talk) 13:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AdeleMarieC! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! MarcGarver (talk) 13:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Hello AdeleMarieC. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:AdeleMarieC. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AdeleMarieC|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot, thank you for your feedback. I am not being paid to produce this wiki article. I'm a lover of interior design in general and Andrew Martin is one of my personal favourite brands. I was surprised to see it didn't already have a wiki page so I wanted to make one. I appreciate your notes and will aim to amend the article accordingly. AdeleMarieC (talk) 15:51, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that the preferred term is article, not the broader "page". That is an important distinction.

What are the three best sources that you have? 331dot (talk) 16:13, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Please see three key sources below. I look forward to receiving your feedback.

https://www.countryandtownhouse.com/brands-guide/andrew-martin/

https://www.ufurnish.com/en-gb/ideas-and-advice/inspiration-behind-the-brand-andrew-martin

https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/style/design-interview-10-minutes-with-martin-waller-of-andrew-martin-a3531376.html AdeleMarieC (talk) 08:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The last two sources are interviews with Mr. Martin; interviews do not establish notability, as it is the subject speaking about themselves(or their company, in this case). Interviews can be used for other purposes, but not to establish notability. The main purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic, on their own and not based on materials from the subject(like an interview).

The first source does not seem to identify an author, and reads like a glowing promotional piece about the company. There might be some value there, but by itself this would be insufficient.

If these are the best sources that you have, I don't think the company merits an article at this time. If sources write extensively about Mr. Martin personally, it's possible that he could merit an article as a notable person even if his company does not. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Martin International (June 2)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 331dot was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

You have flooded the page with references for minor points; it is preferable to have fewer high quality sources than a large number of low quality sources. Concentrate on summarizing your three best sources that give significant coverage of this company and tell why it is important/significant/influential- how it meets WP:ORG. If you work for this company, please see your user talk page for important information about a required disclosure, and respond there. Most of this draft seems to be about the founder of the company, rather than the company itself. It could be that the founder of the company is notable, but not the company itself. I don't know, but this article is trying to be two.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Martin International and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

331dot (talk) 09:04, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Andrew Martin International

Hello, AdeleMarieC. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Andrew Martin International".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 10:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 23)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Timtrent was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:AdeleMarieC/sandbox

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:AdeleMarieC/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Hello AdeleMarieC. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:AdeleMarieC. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AdeleMarieC|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Yet again your behaviour suggests you are in receipt of some form of compensation for your edits, so I am asking the initial question again 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Martin International (May 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Timtrent were:

Lose the list of award winners. If this award is notable, write its own draft, please. You have used this list to make the reader infer a faux-notability. Come to think of it, the awards were funded by the man, not the org. So why is that in here?

Make sure your references confirm what you have written, I was seriously tempted to flag one or more with {{failed verification}}, but that is giving you a fish. Instead I a.m teaching you to fish.

Cite what you write. No citation that it has four showrooms, lose the words. Same with the list of foreign ones.

Why do we need to know about his book? The draft is about his business. What value, cited vale, does the book bring. Do not link to a book sales site. That is spamming. The book is not a reference anyway. If the book passes WP:NBOOK write its own draft.

The draft is not about Martin Waller. It is about Andrew Martin International so think very hard about using biographical details here.

All you need to do is to show that the org passes WP:NCORP. All. So cut, cut and cut again

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Andrew Martin International and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:37, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]