User talk:Jlk0221

Welcome!

Hello, Jlk0221, 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 Peerless Network, Inc., may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Cabayi (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Peerless Network, Inc.

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 Peerless Network, Inc., 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 be 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 or person 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/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 removed 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. Cabayi (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello Jlk0221, I read all your questions at Cabayi talk page which I think you did. Actually the nomination was right due to the way the article was writing. Your article sounds like an Advert. I just made an edit to the article, by fixing the issue raised. You are welcome to the Wikipedia Teahouse where you can ask your questions. Happy editing --Music Boy50 (talk) 22:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peerless Network, Inc. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peerless Network, Inc. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peerless Network, Inc. until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 21:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the discussion is at Articles for deletion you might want to make your vote clearer than Support. WP:DISCUSSAFD offers guidance. Cabayi (talk) 08:48, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peerless Network

Hey there! Your article is now located at Draft:Peerless Network. Feel free to continue working on it there! --Cerebellum (talk) 15:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, as promised I did some research and here is my opinion on the notability of the article. I understand that you want to include the article because the technology that Peerless has developed is important. However, Wikipedia can't just take your word for it - we need sources showing that the technology is important. I think the sources do show that, but just barely.

We need reliable, independent sources. The patents are not independent, so they are not good sources. The Bloomberg and Inc.com pages are just directories, they are not reliable. The WN.com article appears to be a press release, so it is not reliable. The FCC document is just an official document, not an independent source showing that someone has taken note of this company.

However, you have three good sources: the articles from Telecom Signalling, Crain's Chicago, and Web Host Industry Review. As you've noted, articles are organizations are generally assumed to be advertisements, so the notability guideline for them is especially strict - we disallow local media and media of limited interest and circulation. The Crain's Chicago piece is local, and the other two might be considered limited interest, but since you have three I think you are ok. I found one more article as well, which brings us up to four reliable sources. So, in my opinion, the company is notable.

However, before we publish it, we have to remove any promotional material. Take out the press release link and the directory links, and remove unsourced claims like "Peerless Network carries 8 Billion Minutes of Traffic per Month." Once that's done, go ahead and submit the draft for review. This article is a borderline case for notability so I can't guarantee that it will be accepted, but I'd say there's a chance. Don't give up and keep working on the article! Let me know if you have any questions. --Cerebellum (talk) 00:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

I have copied what you wrote on my talk page to the draft talk page at Draft talk:Peerless Network, so that you do not have to write it out again, and anyone reviewing the draft can read it. It reads convincingly, and if sourced it would greatly improve the article, but unless backed up by sources I am afraid it will not be effective, because Wikipedia does not make the subjective judgement Is this important or significant? Instead, the WP:Notability test asks the more objective question Is there evidence that people independent of this consider it important or significant?

Two of our fundamental policies are Wikipedia:Verifiability which requires reliable published sources so that a reader can check on Wikipedia's facts, and Wikipedia:No original research which says that Wikipedia can only report what the sources say, not its editors' deductions from them. Specifically, the No original research policy includes WP:SYNTH: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources."

Your sources show that the company has a number of patents, but the conclusions that those inventions gave "a major contribution to why the majority of Americans and US businesses now enjoy significantly reduced telecommunications rates" and make "the process of placing a wireless phone call significantly less expensive" are not documented by the sources, and so not usable. Was there no comment in the trade press, or in technical journals, on the effect on the telecoms market of these innovations? JohnCD (talk) 22:28, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paid-editing declaration

I guess that you work for Peerless. In that case, you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. You will see that COI editing, while discouraged, is not forbidden, but you should generally submit drafts or make suggestions on article talk pages, rather than editing directly.

What is required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4), and in some jurisdictions by laws against covert advertising, is that you disclose your interest in any edits for which you expect to receive remuneration, either directly or as part of your paid employment. You can do that by a statement on your main user page User:Jlk0221 on the lines of "I am employed by Peerless Networks and edit Wikipedia on their behalf". JohnCD (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually - I am not an employee - and I was simply trying to find a topic to cut my wiki chops on, and thought this might be a good one since I knew of the company and they didn't already have a presence. I thought learning about Wiki would be important -- and fun (I was wrong about the last part.) I have to say as a side note, that the process is very difficult, not because following the guidelines is hard (I honestly think I did that from the onset - and actually met all "notability" criteria, wrote in a neutral voice and only provided facts), but it seems that if the article is about an organization, the assumption is that it is an advertisement (just my novice opinion).

Anyway, as I am still learning here - I don't know where or how to make my final argument for inclusion, so I'll just state it here in the hopes that this is correct. Per the notability guidelines for Organizations - this article and Peerless absolutely meet these requirements - and I've provide ample 3rd-party links to satisfy this criterial. I've also backed that up with links to all of Peerless's patents (which I understand don't qualify as verifiable on their own, but per the guidelines - can act as strong support). Peerless has been in business since 2008, employs 100+ persons, earns an estimated $80+M in revenue (although as a private company, they don't publish their revenues), and has been recognized as outstanding in its field, owns other companies which are listed on Wikipedia (and is mentioned there - with a now-dead link), and employs persons who are notable on their own. Additionally, they've been awarded nine US patents for telecommunication services. Per my interpretation of the guidelines, this article and its subject meets them and should be published on Wikipedia (which is what I honestly care about). Thank you.Jlk0221 (talk) 17:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peerless Network (December 16)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is still only a business listing hence nothing at all for satisfying notability policy; no company gets an automatic article for either existing or by working with others; also, the fact this company is still within 10 years old, it's still too soon for genuine substance in notability.

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:Peerless Network and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

SwisterTwister talk 07:20, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Peerless Network has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Peerless Network. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 06:54, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Peerless Network has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Peerless Network. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 05:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peerless Network (January 24)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), 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:Peerless Network and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 05:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Jlk0221, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 05:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Peerless Network concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Peerless Network, 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) 01:44, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]