Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2022 August 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Help desk
< August 15 << Jul | August | Sep >> August 17 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


August 16

[edit]

07:03:46, 16 August 2022 review of submission by 122.160.153.168

[edit]


Already included notability of the topic in various articles including newspapers, magazines, Please refer to the list below covering the topic under review for notability, I need advice about missing points here, 

1. "PERICENT company disrupted itself from a mere IT service company to high-end enterprise software product company". jantv.in. 2021-12-03. Retrieved 2022-03-07. (Online Newspaper)
2. "Most of Legal Proceedings and Practices are Completely Paper Based Operations, the Legal Industry Still Consume Largest Volume of Physical Paper". India Legal. 2022-02-25. Retrieved 2022-03-03. (Online Newspaper for the legal industry)
3. "Pericent Technologies: Streamlining Roles, Processes, Documents & Policies through BPM/DMS via End-to-End Handholding". enterprise-services.siliconindia.com. Retrieved 2022-03-03. (Online and Printed Media Magzine)
4." Pericent Technologies: Simplifying Business Experience with Enterprise Solutions". InsightsSuccess. 2017-09-26. Retrieved 2022-03-03.
"PERICENT". www.zaubacorp.com. (Online and Printed Media Magzine)
5. "Do Physical Paper-based Operations are still a Reality in Government Departments". APN News. 2022-02-21. Retrieved 2022-03-07. (Online News)
6. "docEdge DMS Reviews - Software Features 2022". Financesonline.com. 
"10 Best Performing BPM Solutions Providers". (Online Third Party Publishing)

It has been a very long time since I am trying to set up the topic, looking for kind help to finally add it Wikipedia 122.160.153.168 (talk) 07:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. No amount of editing can confer notability on a topic. It depends on the coverage in independent reliable sources. An article about a company should not merely document the existence of the company and tell us what it does. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 07:06, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

12:07:53, 16 August 2022 review of draft by MirajkarShahina1

[edit]


MirajkarShahina1 (talk) 12:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hi I am Shahina, Nabeel's mother who made and submiited this draft, this is authentic, please accept it and publish it, the previous draft was made by Nabeel himself, please reject that, Nabeel is a well known actor, please verify online and publish my draft.

Thanks

@NirajkarShahinal: Setting aside the cites being in the completely wrong spots and the obvious WP:BROTHER argument, refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode:
None of these sources help for notability or for biographical claims. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 18:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:31:58, 16 August 2022 review of submission by Bob Dubery

[edit]

I don't understand why this is regarded as unsatisfactory. I have provided sources - or a source. The source is the liner notes for the album that the article deals with. The notes include a multi-page essay with the author clearly identified. I have noted all this in the article.

I'm not looking for an argument. I am genuinely puzzled as to why this article is deemed inadequate. If I don't know what the shortcoming is here, I will likely repeat it. Bob Dubery (talk) 13:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has a single primary source which does not help with any notability, see WP:NALBUM for the criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 15:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article must summarize multiple independent reliable sources(for this process we look for at least three, generally), showing how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability, in this case, of a notable album(as noted by Theroadislong). 331dot (talk) 17:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bob Dubery It's the independent (click here) part that is not met by using the liner notes as a source -- that material is not independent of the album. Sources need to consist of what other people have said (and published) about the artist or album. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:10:32, 16 August 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Bathroominfo

[edit]


Hi Articles For Creation Help Desk,

I tried setting up a Wikipedia page for my employer Durovin Bathrooms. When doing so, I disclosed that I was an employee being paid to do so and then filled out some information on the page. I mentioned the company's founding date, the kind of items they sold and as they are an ecommerce shop, the platforms they sold on. I also filled out some of the information on the company info box. The draft was marked for deletion because it was seen as "just blatant advertising". However, I felt I had just factually described the company and what they do in accordance with the guidelines and similar to how other company pages are written. Because of this, could I please have some advice on how to improve the next submission? For example, next time should I not mention the platforms they sell on and instead simply say that they are an ecommerce site? Also, I currently don't have a detailed account of the history and founding but am working on it, would the incorporation of this improve the likelihood of it being approved?

Kind Regards,

Matt

Bathroominfo (talk) 15:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is significant coverage in independent secondary sources, then there is not much chance he company would be notable enough for an article. Also, stop trying to add links to their site as sources. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:16, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bathroominfo Like many people in your position, you have a fundamental misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is for. When you say that you "had just factually described the company and what they do", this is exactly what Wikipedia is not for. Wikipedia does not have "company pages", not a single one. It has articles about companies. This is a subtle but important distinction. Mere existence is insufficient; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, called notability. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Such sources should not include the company website, staff interviews, press releases, announcements of routine business activities, or other primary sources.
If you are using other articles as a model, you should use those classified as good articles. Otherwise, you run the risk of using one as an example that is problematic. As this is a volunteer effort where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate articles to get by us(in many ways that I won't list here). We can only address what we know about. If you would like to help us out, you can identify these other articles you have seen for possible action. 331dot (talk) 17:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi 331dot,
Thank you for the comprehensive reply, I see my mistake now. I'll report back to my bosses and I'll try again at a later date when we have the relevant sources.
I looked at the Wickes page and Victorian Plumbing page initially as they are similar (but obviously much larger) shops to us.
Kind Regards,
Matt Bathroominfo (talk) 07:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ScottishFinnishRadish,
Thank you for the reply, I see the issue now.
Sorry for the second question, but you said to stop using links to their site as sources, I did this when contributing two paragraphs about different types of sinks to the Sink article by linking some articles on their site that included explanations of those specific fixtures.
Just so I fully understand my mistake and don't make similar ones in the future, could you please elaborate?
Is the issue that the site is not seen as a reliable source because it also sells sinks, or that the articles were not comprehensive enough?
Kind Regards,
Matt Bathroominfo (talk) 08:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bathroominfo Articles about companies are not meant to list or describe all of their products. I can't see the deleted draft, but that might have been an issue. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:05:19, 16 August 2022 review of draft by Geraldo Geraldo Saal

[edit]


Geraldo Geraldo Saal (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What can i change to get my article into the Wikipedia space?

You could suggest how they pass the criteria at WP:NSINGER. Theroadislong (talk) 16:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(Draft deleted, user blocked.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

21:10:13, 16 August 2022 review of draft by AyrtonHolloway

[edit]


  • Hello! Please take a look at this article here for review. It has since been updated but would love to hear your feedback for approval. There are many independent sources here and with this author being a best seller and on the notable Storylines Children's Literature Foundation of New Zealand Notable Books List for 2014, I believe this subject is notable. He has also been published by Random House/Penguin and Allen & Unwin (Please see the sources) Thank you --AyrtonHolloway (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AyrtonHolloway (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AyrtonHolloway: this draft will get reviewed in due course, no need to flag up here.
That said, having taken a very quick look at it just now, I must say you're not doing the draft any favours by REFBOMBING it so heavily; this just makes the reviewer's job that much more arduous, and raises the risk that a reviewer will just give it a miss and move on to something else instead. I'm not saying you should leave out references that are needed, of course, I just don't see how eg. the mere fact that this person published something in 2018 requires eight sources to support it? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2022_August_16&oldid=1106321401"