User talk:FlyingMamboJambo

Welcome!

Hello, FlyingMamboJambo, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Urban Agency A/S, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Kleuske (talk) 07:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Urban Agency A/S

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 Draft:Urban Agency A/S, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Kleuske (talk) 07:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the article.

Can you please provide further non-generic information for the "speedy deletion" tag?

I think I provided quite a few reputable independent references and avoided non-factual language.

Looking forward to improve the article. FlyingMamboJambo (talk) 08:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for maintaining wikipedia.

I have read the "advertising and promotion" guidelines and I struggle to see the sales-language and the commercial links. Maybe you can provide some additional guidance to make the article I proposed be more accurate and factual?

Maybe an example on this specific case would help me clarify how to move forward.

thanks FlyingMamboJambo (talk) 10:35, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jimfbleak,

did you have time to review the block? ~I understand your concerns, I should have tackled smaller improvements on other peoples articles before going on my own and creating one.

But I have some time on my hands at the moment and would like to contribute. So your review and advise as to how to proceed would be greatly appreciatted.

Regards,

FlyingMamboJambo (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for email If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, 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:FlyingMamboJambo. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=FlyingMamboJambo|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Also read the following regarding writing an article:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

I note that your bare url references included press releases, interviews with company executives and sites with no real content apart from lists of projects

The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

The company appears to have no employees, turnover, management structure or profits

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

I've seen worse, but your lead section basically name checked the company with award-winning... broad international profile... expanded to include a large international team... works on projects that span across a variety of building sectors... No real facts, just company talk. The rest was a list of projects, and an interminable list of supposed awards, none of which have wikilinks to the awards or the awarding body, like RIBA

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

I didn't check.

Not reasons for deletion, but you should format your refs and use wikilinks llke architecture, Copenhagen etc.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article.

If you have a conflict of interest, you must disclose the nature of that COI.

I've read your email, and I'll unblock you if you undertake not to edit about anything connected with Urban Agency and to follow the guidance above. Alternatively, you can request an unblock by completing {{unblock|reason= }} here and saving.

You can reply here, and I will see the message if you start it with my username User:Jimfbleak, and sign it with four tildes ~~~~ in the same edit. I may not see it until tomorrow (in the UK) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimfbleak

Hi, thank you for the constructive feedback. I do not have any conflict of interest with Urban Agency, I work in a completely unrelated field. I do also live in Copenhagen which is where they are based, so there is that.

I did have a nice chat in the help forum, and they also mentioned some of the same concerns regarding the sources, language and notability (and how awards do not correspond to notability). I also had a chance to review the notability and some other guidelines/policies, which are quite extensive (and maybe sometimes not very exact). But I understand the raised concerns and I looking back I do agree that the language could have been more neutral and the sources better selected.

In summary, I thought it was a nice opportunity to add to Wikipedia something that it was lacking, and the more I looked, the more I kept finding. And I saw that Henning Larsen and Cobe have similar pages and I took those as an inspiration. (another pitfall that the admin in the forum warned me about already).

Btw, with a quick check on Linkedin and the Danish tax agency (which holds official publicly available anual reports and tax returns) you can see their average employee count, turnover, tax returns, and much more. (In case you are curious or moderate the danish wikipedia landscape often, it can be quite interesting to explore.)

But moving forward, I won't edit Urban Agency and will focus on something smaller instead of a full new page and see how that goes.

That being said, I did get a bit frustrated to be immediatly get blocked without any actual contructive criticism at first. I understand that there are many attempts for self-endorsement going, but it seemed I was caught on a blocking rampage. My apologies for my frustration.

Thank you again and have a nice weekend.

FlyingMamboJambo (talk) 11:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak Sorry, just figuring the tagging thing out. Hope this works now. FlyingMamboJambo (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As you say, the vast majority of company articles are written by employees or others working for the company, and a block, is pretty well automatic for spamming, undisclosed paid editing or both. Most don't even bother requesting an unblock once it becomes clear they won't be permitted to write about their company. I'll unblock you once I've finished here. Starting with a smaller edit is a good idea, not only because it's hard for a new editor to write a full article from scratch, but also because creating a full company or product article as a first significant edit is a characteristic of paid editors and attracts admin attention. pleas ask if you are need any help, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:29, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked now Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:30, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]