User talk:Tay Chinyi

Welcome!

Hello, Tay Chinyi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as F.I.T.S - Carl Jung Type Indicator, Simplified Version, 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! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:08, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of F.I.T.S - Carl Jung Type Indicator, Simplified Version

The article F.I.T.S - Carl Jung Type Indicator, Simplified Version has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Although Jung did classify these four personality types, and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is based on them, in a more complex fashion than described here, there is no indication in any search that I can perform that there is a notable personality test of this name.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:08, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear WikiDan61,

Thank you for your response and an opportunity to understand the nitty-gritty of publishing an article on Wikipedia.

We have observed that there are many articles on Psychometric Assessment on Wikipedia. Being in the industry for many years, we would prefer to use your platform for spreading awareness of a simpler version of Carl Jungs theory, through our FITS assessment.

Since Wikipedia is an insightful platform for enriching knowledge, we would want to value add from our expertise in the domain of psychometric assessment.

We do not see Wikipedia as a promoting tool,however, we see it as a medium to share our knowledge and create awareness in people.

We have implemented the FITS Assessment with many individuals and companies for over 13 years. Few of the companies are Toyota, DrReddy’s, Volvo, Titan, Wipro, TVS, Biocon, Mercedes Benz, Sony, John Crane, Canon and many more. If you would want to search online about our assessment, then you could use ‘FITS, oscarmurphy’ as a search option.

We request you to guide us to enable us publish articles on Wikipedia. Our queries are:-

1. What are the Guidelines to ensure the article/s meets Wikipedia norms?

2. As we understand, websites, blogs, social media articles/write ups are not considered as references, thereby, please define the appropriate reference/s considered to publish articles on Wikipedia. Look forward to hear from you to enable us prescribe to the Wikipedia procedure.

Tay Chinyi (talk) 10:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you claim to have created the FITS Assessment tool, your publication of that information here would constitute original research, which is disallowed at Wikipedia. Publish your technique and results in a reputable peer-reviewed journal, and if enough people take notice of that publication (i.e. if the technique becomes widely adapted or the paper widely cited), then the technique may be considered notable enough to be covered in Wikipedia. Please recall that Wikipedia is not a platform to promote your technique. You claim that you "do not see Wikipedia as a promoting tool", but rather seek to "create awareness in people". Do you not see "creating awareness" of a technique you yourself invented as a form of promotion? I do. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:02, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]