User talk:Novey.n

Novey.n, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Novey.n! 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 Worm That Turned (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Introductions

Hey there, thanks for introducing yourself on my page! I've seen the first season of Adventure Time but one of these days I need to get around to watching the rest. I would love to see pictures of your zoo! I surround myself with animals as well. Rroberie (talk) 16:36, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!

It's great to hear from you -- and I'm looking forward to working with your class this semester! I love seeing the variety of topics people choose, and I hope you find it rewarding to add to Wikipedia. AmandaRR123 (talk) 13:41, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Clear Labs

I appreciate that you are new here. Might I suggest that you move Clear Labs back to your sandbox or to Draft article space. It just isn't ready for main space yet and if it stays there it is at risk of deletion. Better to improve it in a safe environment than have it deleted. Fighting to restore a deleted article is much more difficult than getting it right in the first instance. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   19:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Velella, you are correct that I am new here, thank you for your suggestion.

Feedback

Nice work on your article draft. I added Template:Infobox company; I just filled in the bare-bones information, but you can expand it further as outlined on the template page. Here are a few improvements you should consider

1. The lead section is supposed to summarize the contents of the article - it shouldn't include information that isn't discussed elsewhere in the article. The information about location, origins, the basics of the services provided, and the accreditation should be mentioned elsewhere. In light of this
2. Add a "History" section. The article by Kim LaCapria on Snopes actually gives some interesting history, like the Kickstarter campaign.
3. Make sure that all abbreviations are fully spelled out the first time they are used. Not just things like AOAC and A2LA, but also the FDA and GMOs.
4. Avoid using external links in the body of the article, like you did with the AOAC and A2LA links. Instead, you should include these certifications as references, and include the external link in the references.
5. Only proper nouns should be capitalized - that's true both in the body of the article and in the headers. For example, you refer to "The Company"
6. Don't treat section headers as part of the text. For example, in the Clear View section you never name the "main product" outside of the section header. Make sure that the text make sense even if the section header isn't there.
7. Make sure that every statement in the article can be tied directly to a supporting source. Generally, a paragraph shouldn't continue beyond the final reference.
8. Don't make statements in relation to "now" - time passes. Some of the content in Wikipedia articles is 15 years old. So when you say that the company has published three reports "to date", you need to say when now is. "As of October 2016", perhaps.
9. Make sure your language isn't promotional. You're writing an encyclopedia article, not advertising. For example:

Clear labs caters to manufacturers who wish to optimize the quality of their supply

This is promotional language. They don't actually "cater"; rather, they market their services to certain companies. Clear Labs is selling a service, not fulfilling wishes. And "optimiz[ing] the quality" isn't actually what's at work here - they're testing the honesty and reliability of their suppliers perhaps.

Avoid jargon.

The database also compiles multiple insights on a food item

For starters, a database is a collection of indexed information - it can't do things. Secondly, these aren't "insights". "Analyzed at a molecular level" is more jargon - all chemical analysis happens at the "molecular level". "Molecular level analyses" is just a marketing term for "chemical testing".

You should also avoid referring to "the client" - that's a good hint that your language or focus isn't that of an encyclopedia article.

As I said, it's a really nice start. But it happens to have the kinds of problems that Wikipedians tend to take issue with - most notably, the promotional language. People are (rightly) concerned about Wikipedia being used by companies to promote themselves. For that reason, it's important to avoid that kind of thing. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2016 (UTC)