User talk:Jole222

This is Jole222'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: C.C.P Contact Probes (October 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—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 (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:NCOMPANY, lacks significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 09:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jole222! Having an article 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! Dan arndt (talk) 09:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: C.C.P Contact Probes (October 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Galobtter was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—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 (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

See previous, please find and add independent references

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:20, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: C.C.P Contact Probes (October 15)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by DGG were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This topic is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: this remains a promotional article more appropriate for a company web page than for an encyclopedia . Theee is no evidence the firm meets outr notability standards

DGG ( talk ) 08:17, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:C.C.P Contact Probes. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: C.C.P Contact Probes has been accepted

C.C.P Contact Probes, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:43, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Jole222, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to C.C.P Contact Probes. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 16:52, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of C.C.P Contact Probes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article C.C.P Contact Probes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C.C.P Contact Probes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 01:03, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NCORP

I hope to work with you in reworking this guideline. For my current ideas on another & more radical approach to the overall problem, see my brief presentation at Wikiconference North America a few days ago, at [1] . It was the argument by Legacypac as extended by you at the current AfD & my residual discontent with my position at other recent ones that were argued similarly, that led me to realize my current interpretation needed to be rethought; it was in connection with other discussions earlier in that meeting that led to to the recent presentation on the past Saturday. (not that what I proposed there is an immediately practical solution. ) DGG ( talk ) 05:08, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would very much like to contribute to this and add my thoughts to develop a better guideline for what Wikipedia should cover, and what is irrelevant. I will try to make a draft of rules that could be taken into account to decide the relevance of an article. I personally also think Wikipedia could formalize the company articles more to avoid promotional writing styles especially the first paragraph. Let me work out a proposal over the next week. Could you also point me to further discussions on the topic?Jole222 (talk) 07:28, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]