User talk:Raptorsquad

Blocked

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Raptorsquad (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. Place any further information here. If this is due to be using a hotspot, I travel a lot and thus use hotspots. However, if you require me to use a home or office stationary internet please let me know, and tell me how to re-engage using that static IP

Decline reason:

We would need to know the IP mentioned in the block message to say more about the specific block that's affecting you, but this issue should resolve itself once you aren't using that web host any more. Huon (talk) 12:31, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (November 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gbawden 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 people 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 User:Raptorsquad/sandbox 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.

Gbawden (talk) 13:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that the company is notable - it is just another company. See the notability requirements at WP:NCORP. Also the promotional aspects raised by another reviewer have not been addressed Gbawden (talk) 17:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tea house

Hello! Raptorsquad, 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! Gbawden (talk) 13:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Incognito Worldwide India (December 22)

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 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

First, we will not accept paid press or republished PR at all; next, is the fact this is still specifically an advertisement because it only focuses with what they themselves would advertise: "Information", "Awards", Services" and "Clients"; what our notability policies explicitly need is actual in-depth third-party news and not simply PR announcements and mentions. However, the sheer fact this is only 3 years old, it's quite rare for any company to be notable and not simply resort to self-advertising (regardless if intended or not).

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:Incognito Worldwide India 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 19:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More may be found here.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:36, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One of the remarks I received from those offering advise, which I do greatly appreciate, cited articles he thought would establish notability. But those are the exact article I did list, and it is still being dismissed; one comment was that they didn't accept paid advertising -- BUT I NEVER PAID FOR THOSE ARTICLES. So I remain confused as to what they editors want, and discouraged from contributing to Wiki.

Raptorsquad (talk) 13:16, 25 February 2017 (UTC) [[User:Raptorsquad|talk 19:07, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incognito Worldwide

I saw your post on the Wikipedia Helpdesk and noticed that the volunteers failed to provide you with concrete advice. For what it is worth, here are some tips and tricks that might help you out

If you want to have your article accepted, you will need to focus on two core things: reliable sources and notability of the subject. Here follow some notes about these:

Reliable sources See secondary sources; WP:RS / WP:RELIABLE

Wiki editors are just crazy about reliable sources. In general this means references to academic articles, text books and reputable magazines/ newspapers. WP editors prefer sources that have some kind of moderation or fact checking in place - that is, where articles are checked by senior editors or legal people prior to publication. Wikipedia editors are deeply suspicious of primary sources (corporate websites, company media releases, company biographies) and they also hate some secondary sources notably blogs, personal biographies that might have been written by the subject or his/her family or colleagues. In short, they hate anything at all that lacks objectivity or could sound promotional in character. It's crazy because about 70% of all business news is heavily influenced by corporate copy via media releases etc - so the newspaper article is often similar or identical to the corporate news release. BUT at Wikipedia, commentary will pass without comment if it comes from a reputable paper such as the New York Times yet will attract very close scrutiny if it comes from a company media release.

Notability See notable and WP:ORG/ WP:COMPANY Articles about companies do not automatically get accepted into Wikipedia. The organisation must satisfy WP's notability criteria for companies. If you have any chance of getting your article accepted by Wikipedia, you will need to establish notability. This means that the company must have received significant news coverage in independent, reliable sources such as newspapers, TV coverage etc

Look for things like the the company:

being recipient of an award or accolade (e.g. an advertising award)
being ranked in some kind of official corporate ranking scheme (e.g. green consumer rankings, Forbes Top 500 companies list, Nielsen's top 100 brands, top tech companies)
having a notable person as CEO, CFO or CMO (but persons must also satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria as well)
being involved in some kind of legal test case or legal precedent
being involved in some kind of controversy that generated positive or negative press coverage (e.g. a PR crisis, a social media storm)
being engaged in some innovative business practice or process (but innovative must be a description used by an independent source)
as a generous philanthropist (giving to charities), or benefactor (of the arts, sports, community groups) (as above - generous must be a descriptive term used by an independent source)

A few events/ sources that you can use in your article

I did a quick search and found the following that might be helpful for your article:

Named start up of the month, August, 2014 See: http://inwwc.com/company/news/item/277-incognito-worldwide-named-startup-of-the-month (this is a blog which Wiki editors tend to regard as unreliable, so it would be even better if you could find the original article in Silicone India

Named one of the most promising companies for 2015 See: http://www.siliconindia.com/magazine-articles-in/Most_Promising_Marketing_Companies__2015_-DJLS882303349.html

Selected by Insight Success Magazine to their list of ‘Top 20 Consulting Companies.’ See: http://insightssuccess.in/incognito-worldwide-transcending-digital-branding-with-inventiveness/ and http://www.intechcreative.com/index.php/news/itemlist/tag/incognito%20worldwide

General corporate information (from independent source) See: http://www.siliconindia.com/magazine-articles-in/Incognito_Worldwide_Believing_in_Being_the_Best_Not_Just_Good-GYDR676665602.html

How to find independent, reliable sources (i.e. sources that are not from the company)

Do a search of local newspapers e.g. find reputable local titles and search their news archives for any mention of the company
Do a Google Advanced search (https://www.google.com/advanced_search) and use terms like "Incognito Worldwide" in one line and "News" in another line.

(You can vary the Google search by using specific terms e.g. In Google, replace "News" with "Award" and see what comes up or simply add "Award" to both "Incognito Worldwide" and "News". You usually have to experiment with this - but the approach generally yields good results.)

Can you translate articles that might have been written in a local language? (faithful translations are permissable for Wikipedia)
Go to your local library and search one of the finding guides such as ABI/Inform and also search one of the company directories such as Jobsons (ask your librarian for assistance if you have not used these before)

BronHiggs (talk) 03:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I get what your'e saying, but I provided three magazines, and the one article on the website I listed shows the magazine cover and article because it was not an online magazine, it was a print publication. What no one has told me though I've asked over and over is, how many articles does it take to be notable? I felt the nature of the rise of this company was different and interesting, but just now feel as though i am wasting my time trying to get anything published on Wiki. They won't approve anything I list, yet I come across articles on here with countless factual errors. Very frustrating. This is the second article I have attempted to publish with the same result -- the first one was a TV commentary that has been on TV or over 15 years commentating as a legal analyst on some of the biggest legal cases in the USA. She apparently wasn't notable either. I guess I'll just stick to magazine reporting and writing columns.