User talk:Sophie at Mont Marte

Sophie at Mont Marte, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Sophie at Mont Marte! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mont Marte

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 Mont Marte, 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. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:26, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Page has been submitted as a draft for review.

Recommendations

Hi. Please submit paid articles for review with the Articles for Creation process. They can give helpful pointers about tone and sourcing, for example.

Wikipedia articles try to only summarize what reliable independent sources say.

From a quick Google search, it appears Mont Marte may not yet meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

– Thjarkur (talk) 09:32, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, you must follow the guidance below:

This is pretty much a standard company promo, lots of history (already tagged This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience.), "this is what we sell" and few proper references or real facts.
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. Most of your text was unreferenced, and the refs you did give included interviews with your bosses, obviously not independent third-party sources, and just the contents page of Business Acumen which verifies nothing. Your ad agency is also not an independent source.
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 claim the brand is stocked in over 3,500 retail stores in more than 80 countries. has no independent source, there is nothing about number of employees, turnover or profits

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews. The writing isn't terrible, although the easiest and most cost-effective way... When the canvases went on to sell better than other products... affordable art supplies... is clear promo. Referring to "Bob and Carol" is also inappropriate.
There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
Your text was basically created in a single edit without proper refs, and with no wikilinks, not even Brisbane. It's obviously been copied from elsewhere. You must not copy text from elsewhere into Wikipedia. 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.

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.

Also note that because of your COI, you mustn't create the article directly, you should write a draft and submit it for review. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, article has been edited and submitted as a draft for review.

More

Thanks for message. please look again at my guidance above. Most of your draft was unreferenced, and of the 4 refs you did give, two were interviews with your bosses, one was just a mention in the contents page of a magazine, and one seemed to be your branding associate. We need independent third-party sources, not the company talking about itself, and real facts.

The tone is encyclopaedic, with the time-line in the historic present tense, and probably better written in sentences anyway, and promotional the company's vision to empower everyone to create. I think the table of products, or any sort of list of products, rather than text, looks promotional too. The company is probably notable, and your page wasn't dreadful, but company articles are always going to attract scrutiny, so you need more and better refs and proper prose rather than what amounts to lists of events and products Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again,

Thank you for your helpful feedback, I will make those edits and working on sourcing more third-party references.

Just a couple queries regarding your guidance. Based off other company pages (from the same industry), It's my understanding that minimal references (only four) and a table of products are also acceptable for this page?

Thank you. Sophie at Mont Marte (talk) 00:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mont Marte (September 13)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing 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). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Mont Marte 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:Mont Marte, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 16:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Mont Marte

Hello, Sophie at Mont Marte. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mont Marte, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]