User talk:B.gauthier.quebec

This is B.gauthier.quebec's talk page, where you can send him 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: Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation (April 10)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

– Craig Davison (talk) 11:00, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, B.gauthier.quebec! Having an article 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! – Craig Davison (talk) 11:00, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation (April 28)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

EROS ^message 08:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Voluntary_Organization_for_Professional_Evaluation

Greetings. On Wikipedia, notability is established on the basis of your sources. Quality sources of course, all in all which are - reliable, WP:PSTS and sources which provides significant coverage. 1. References about the subject — at least one lengthy paragraph, preferably more. Not passing mentions, not directory listings, not just any old thing that happens to have the name in it. Several of them. The subject of the article must be notable. 2. Published sources that have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. A major newspaper, a factual, widely-published book, high-quality generally trusted mainstream publications. Not blogs, MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, fansites, Twitter, wikis, or other sites with user-generated content. The content of the article must be verifiable. 3. Nothing written by the subject, paid for by the subject, or affiliated with the subject. Not their website, and not a press release. The sources must be independent.

Moreover, do read on WP:NCORP to see if the organisation you are writing fulfils the very notability established for corporations. If any question persist, you can ping me or post it as a question at the AfC Helpdesk, with editors more than 10 years of experience to help you. EROS ^message 10:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About sourcing

For reliable sources, read WP:RS. You stated that you sourced journals and sources like Sage, Information Age Publishing, Springer, UNICEF. Journals are a good source as reference. However, for websites like UNICEF, that will be primary sources. It is best to have a diverse range of references, not only primary sources. Cite third party sources: mainstream publications, newspapers, magazines or books. Stay away from homepages and official websites. EROS ^message 06:40, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Moreover, by any chance, are you writing on behalf of the organisation or for someone in the organisation. Or, are you being paid by the organisation or an elsewhere party to write this draft? If so, it is advised to declare your paid editing. EROS ^message 06:42, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC Submission

For your references, please find some newspaper articles too. UNICEF and those which you inserted will not be enough to suffice as a third party source. If you need a much comprehensive feedback or a second opinion, do post a question at the AfC Helpdesk. EROS ^message 11:26, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Afc subm.

Dear, Wikipedia is established based on a set of rules. For reliable sourcing, please go through WP:RS as you are indeed having clueless ideas on it. As to why some sources are better than others, Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance. Your answer lies there. With your confusion on reliable sourcing, I feel it is best that you post a question to AfC Helpdesk, link embedded in your declination banner. EROS ^message 13:37, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation. Thanks! Worldbruce (talk) 06:05, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation

Hello, B.gauthier.quebec. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus 05:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation

Hello, B.gauthier.quebec. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. Snowycats (talk) 17:38, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:24, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation

Hello, B.gauthier.quebec. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Voluntary Organization for Professional Evaluation".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! HasteurBot (talk) 04:02, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]