• Hartevans (talk · contribs)
  • User:Hartevans/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hartevans (talk) 02:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• K A Amarnath (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Amarnath K A (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The article has sufficient coverage in multiple independent reliable sources with a reputation in fact ckecking.please state why the article was declined. K A Amarnath (talk) 03:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A just released book, sources are almost entirely (if not entirely) press releases, a Google Books link, and a reference to a Wikipedia article. A clear attempt at self-promotion. It's not time for this yet. Please do not attempt to self-promote on Wikipedia. Waggie (talk) 03:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 103.54.25.34 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Deepak Mittal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

103.54.25.34 (talk) 04:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the third time you or somebody else asks about this very page here. No, nothing has changed since the last time. Please use your browsers search function to find the previous sections on this page. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• AmanMagar (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sipradi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am a research student and was doing research for one of my assignments on big corporate houses in Nepal like IMS group, Chaudhary group, etc. and I was unable to find the information about the SIPRADI trading. So, I collected information from calling and messaging to the company. Since I have got the information I thought why not create the page and provide information for others as well. I am a nonrelated person to any organization listed. Hope you would reconsider about the deletion of the page.

Regards. AmanMagar (talk) 05:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AmanMagar: the page wasnt deleted. If it were deleted in Wikipedia's sence of the word, the link immedately above would turn up in red. Your submission currently contains a lot of puffery words which should not be used on Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Anna Tatchers (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Paul Rosero Contreras (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I'm Anna, I'm trying to put the information about artists and researcher Paul Rosero Contreras on Wikipedia, the draft was declined but I don't understand the real reason. The comment that I got is this "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". But this individual together with his artistic and academic team do a lot for the society and nature, he is a bright representative of an international art society being invited participant to many significant art events and initiatives around the globe - Venice Biennial, Antarctic Biennale, Moscow Biennale, Siggraph among others. He leads international art and science expeditions to remote spots on our planet, work a lot on ecological topics and spreading education and tolerance around the globe. I'm sure that Mr Rosero's activities should be presented on Wikipedia. He has many interviews and publications, links on those that I found I placed in the draft. So I'm trying to understand - what is wrong and how to succeed in presenting the article. I'm not a technical person, this "codes" approach is not easy for me, but I'm trying to do my best to understand what I need to improve to see this article published.

thanks in advance, Anna

Anna Tatchers (talk) 13:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Sbmnlaw (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Secugenius (2) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Secugenius is ten year old company and working globally and why the draft is not moved to the article main space, please explain. Raj Kumar 15:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

• Kinman1996 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Kinman1996/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I've added some external links to help with notability. Kinman1996 (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kinman1996: Lets have a look at the references:

• #1 is the company's own website and not independent
• #2 is a press release and neither independent (plus im pretty sure this website isnt WP:RS anyway)
• #3 is an interview with the company's CEO and doesnt help establish notability either
• #4 seems to be mainly reporting what the companies said, is a WP:PRIMARY source as well
• #5 is yet another link to the company's website

to conclude, none of the links currently satisfy the criteria to establish Notability. Wikipedia requires reliable independent sources that discuss the subject in some depth. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• ChrisHeers2001 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Bamtang Games (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Bamtang Games should stay on Wikipedia like Purple Lamp Studios. I tried everything that I can to have there be as many reliable sources as possible. ChrisHeers2001 (talk) 18:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisHeers2001 Your draft has been rejected, meaning it will not be considered further. You do not have independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the company itself(not just its products) showing how it meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Not every company merits a Wikipedia article, even within the same field. 331dot (talk) 19:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any more independent reliable sources about the company itself? ChrisHeers2001 (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisHeers2001 Please place further replies in this existing section. If there is not any independent sources with significant coverage of this company itself, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 20:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ubiquitouslarry (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Soft Robotics, Inc. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I would like advice on how to improve the article I am writing. It has been rejected twice for sounding more like an advertisement and less like an encyclopedic entry. I have removed peacock works and self-aggrandizing language. The entry — at least to my reading — reads as factual statements, rather than opinions. Is it the subject matter that needs to be pared down? Or am I overlooking something else?

Thanks in advance for you time.

Ubiquitouslarry (talk) 19:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ubiquitouslarry Your draft just tells about the company and what it does. Any Wikipedia article must do more than merely provide "factual information". Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. A Wikipedia article must only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about(in this case) a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Press releases, announcements of routine business transactions or work, descriptions of products, staff interviews, and other primary sources do not establish notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself or what it does, only in what others say about it. 331dot (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 777ray (talk · contribs)
  • Guillem Anglada Escudé (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Draft:Guillem Anglada Escudé (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi I do not see any reason as to why this article has been rejected for notability reasons. A page exists for the same figure on the Spanish Wiki and it has less sources, yet it has not been declined. This is a notable scientist who has contributed significantly in his field and can be found in major news sources. Please clarify.

777ray (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

777ray Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, each with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. Please review the information and links left by the reviewer. 331dot (talk) 19:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Silversonicaxel (talk · contribs)
  • GlenWyvis Distillery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I am creating a page of the Distillery GlenWyvis, a real Scottish distillery, that is also listed in this valid Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/List_of_whisky_distilleries_in_Scotland. I am trying to understand what is the missing content of the page I submitted to turn into a notable page for Wikipedia, but I cannot understand at the moment what I am missing? Still lack of content? I understand it is not a lot yet, but I thought as a starting page could be enough. Checking other pretty empty profile similar, like the following one https://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Allt-A-Bhainne I can't get what I'm missing to complete GlenWyvis profile. So here I am to understand better what I can improve to legitimate this page. Thanks a lot.

Silversonicaxel (talk) 22:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Silversonicaxel: Wikipedia doesnt contain "profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles about subjects that satisfy our special inclusion criteria. The current draft doesnt appear to indicate this is met. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Victor Schmidt mobil: I didn't mean to declassify Wikipedia to a social network using the word "profile", my bad I misused the word. The thing is, I think GlenWyvis page meets the requirements for being on Wikipedia -otherwise I wouldn't have tried-, but apparently not, so I asked why it isn't, but the answer is not really helping out, it's like asking `Why is it wrong?` and hear as an answer `It's wrong because it is wrong`. So I am here asking again what is missing in the GlenWyvis page, in order to fulfil the missing requirements. Thanks again. Silversonicaxel (talk) 05:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Silversonicaxel: As noted by the reviewer, you do not have independent reliable sources with significant coverage of this company, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable company. You have a few sources describing certain industry awards the company has won, but that is not significant coverage of the distillery itself. 331dot (talk) 13:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Yahiachaib22 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Aramakers Group (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Yahiachaib22 (talk) 23:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yahiachaib22: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We do not allow advertising, "generating awareness" or "spreading the word" about something. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]