User talk:Linamiko

This is Linamiko's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Airfocus (April 25)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by 331dot were:

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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Airfocus and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

331dot (talk) 10:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Linamiko! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation 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! 331dot (talk) 10:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COI[edit]

You declared a conflict of interest, what is the general nature of it? 331dot (talk) 10:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @331dot, I have declared the conflict because the article was written about the software my employer produces. I have read the guidelines carefully and declared the conflict accordingly. Is there anything I should have done differently?

I would also love some more feedback as to what makes the article sound like an advertisement. I am happy to amend those issues promptly. Linamiko (talk) 10:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are editing about your employer's product, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing disclosure instead of the COI disclosure. Employment is sufficient to trigger this requirement- you do not need to be specifically paid to make edits. If your superiors have asked you to be here, please read WP:BOSS(maybe read it even if they haven't) and have your superiors read it too.

Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about a product and what it does, or routine activities related to its development(like raising funds to finance it). An article must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the product, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable product. We don't want to know what the makers of a product say about it, we want to know what others wholly unaffiliated with the product say about it. This is usually very difficult for people in your position to do. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for taking the time to explain.

So, just to make sure I understood correctly: The main issue is that the sources aren't reliable/ diverse enough for the topic to qualify for a Wikipedia article, right? The other issue about the paid editing disclosure is essentially an easy fix. Linamiko (talk) 12:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; most of your sources are either the company itself(to document the features/etc. of the product) or announcements of the raising of funds to develop the product. Those things don't establish notability(though if notability were established, those might be valid article content). Is this product particularly influential on an industry or industries according to independent sources? (for example Microsoft Windows has 70% market share) Do others attempt to emulate it? Have professional software critics/reviewers reviewed this software? Things like that. 331dot (talk) 13:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]