NiHuiShan

Your submission at Articles for creation: KOKUA Bikes (August 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:KOKUA Bikes 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:04, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

"Pure advertising, with zero evidence of notability." Can you define what "notability" means? This is a company entry providing relevant informations about its history and products. If Frog Bikes (for example) is permitted, why KOKUA Bikes can't be? And it is a fact that the company did impact the cycling world as cited by the Balance bike wikipedia page. On top of it, the photograph illustrating the article IS a KOKUA LIKEaBIKE. NiHuiShan (talk) 06:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability is defined at Wikipedia:Notability, and the subject-specific guideline for the notability of companies is at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). jlwoodwa (talk) 07:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

So what makes Frog Bikes make the cut and not KOKUA Bikes? In this context, KOKUA Bikes has more notability than Frog Bikes since KOKUA Bikes is cited in Balance bike within Wikipedia itself. Can you please elaborate? NiHuiShan (talk) 07:59, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

You need to read the pages I linked. Wikipedia citing a source does not in any way make that source notable. jlwoodwa (talk) 08:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, NiHuiShan! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:04, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:KOKUA Bikes

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:KOKUA Bikes, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: KOKUA Bikes (August 7)

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

jlwoodwa (talk) 07:04, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you please help with some pointers (besides the boilerplate-template automatically coming with a rejection)? NiHuiShan (talk) 07:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay, here's what you need to do:

1. Find a few (3-5) secondary sources (newspapers, magazines, TV or radio programmes, etc.) that are reliable and independent of the subject, and that have provided significant coverage directly of the subject. Note: we don't accept anything based on press releases, interviews, 'sponsored' content or other churnalism, or much of what gets published in the trade press.
2. Summarise what they have said, in your own words (no copypasting or very close paraphrasing) but without putting any 'spin' or embellishment on things.
3. Cite each source against the information it has provided.
4. If needed, you may then supplement this with information from primary sources such as the company's website, but this must be limited to purely factual and entirely non-contentious details such as year of founding, location of HQ, etc.

This gives you appropriate content and the necessary referencing and evidence of notability all at once. Any other approach is almost guaranteed to fail.

Your draft was entirely unreferenced, apart from one (fairly lightweight) academic paper that didn't seem to feature Kokua. This means that the draft was basically just you telling the world about this business, which is pretty much the definition of promotion (see WP:YESPROMO). For this reason, the draft has been deleted.

We have no interest in what the company wants to say about itself, we're interested in what independent third parties have said about it and what makes it noteworthy. We also don't want to see extensive product information and images; this is an encyclopaedia, not an online sales brochure.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Tks for the pointers, I'll start with that. You did not answer my question about the root theme wikipedia page being a source of notability (KOKUA Bikes and his founder Rolf Mertens are referenced in balance bike as the creator of the balance bike for kids). The french translation of the very same page says the same. NiHuiShan (talk) 08:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

No, you cannot even cite Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia, let alone use it to establish notability. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you then accept the same external sources supporting existing wikipedia articles on the exact same topic? NiHuiShan (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you asking whether it's okay to use sources that are already cited in other articles, to support some information in your draft? Yes, of course.

But I re-iterate my point that drafting should mainly be done by summarising what appropriate sources have said, not by writing what you want and then trying to find sources that support this (we call that writing WP:BACKWARD). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

"Your draft was entirely unreferenced, apart from one (fairly lightweight) academic paper that didn't seem to feature Kokua". This same paper was accepted as a source for the Balance bike page Balance bike#cite note-Becker-7 in association with Rolf Mertens.

Then, to quote you: "didn't seem to feature Kokua". Have you actually read the research paper and actually paid to access the full piece? NiHuiShan (talk) 03:03, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

That source is used in that article to support a claim. Demonstrating notability is harder than just supporting a claim; many sources are capable of the latter but not the former. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:10, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I just got access to No Need for Training Wheels through the Wikipedia Library, and I can confirm that it does not mention Kokua at all. If a source is difficult to access, it can still be cited on Wikipedia, but you need to accurately represent that source. Doing otherwise is disruptive. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:23, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Email

Hi, I noticed you emailed me about your deleted draft. I prefer to keep discussion about my admin actions on wiki so if you have questions, would you be alright with repeating them here? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure. The Draft you deleted contains hours of work and I don't have any backup since - believe it or not - It never crossed my mind that it would be canned like this without prior notice. Now that @DoubleGrazing took the time to share a couple of pointers, I can start making the proper adjustments so it complies with the rules. But for that, I need you to restore the draft. NiHuiShan (talk) 08:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I asked a few other admins about this and they don't think I should undelete the page, as it does clearly meet the WP:G11 speedy deletion criteria. If you wish to try writing an article, I'd recommend starting from scratch completely and following this guide. That said, I'm sympathetic to the idea that you've lost hours of work. If you wish to use the text on some other site like a blog, I'm willing to email you the text. I just want to make sure you wouldn't recreate the draft with the exact same promotional language, if that makes sense? Just confirm that and I'll send it. Apologies for the delay, I'm quite busy today. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 09:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

If you can email me the content of the very first draft that was submitted and rejected, that is all I am asking for. As you rightfully pointed out, it represents work and effort. Should it meet Wikipedia:G11criteria is the admins prerogative, I believe whether to send it to oblivion or not should by mine. NiHuiShan (talk) 02:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Let me know if you have any further questions. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. NiHuiShan (talk) 03:03, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually I meant the first submitted draft. NiHuiShan (talk) 03:09, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

To clarify: first submitted draft for review. NiHuiShan (talk) 03:10, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright, will send another email then with that text. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Tks! NiHuiShan (talk) 06:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

August 2024

Hello NiHuiShan. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:NiHuiShan. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=NiHuiShan|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:24, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I can see that you have disclosed your conflict of interest (COI) in general terms. I'm guessing (and perfectly happy to be proven wrong, of course!) this is because you're working for Kokua Bikes, either in an employment or contractor/freelance capacity. If so, then you need to make the more specific paid-editing disclosure, as detailed above. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

No, I am not a KOKUA Bikes employee, nor a contractor or a freelance. I am not paid to write anything. NiHuiShan (talk) 08:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

In that case, can you please elaborate on the nature of your COI regarding this subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

My COI inherently comes from the fact that as a parent I am using their products for my kids and was so impressed by the positive impact it has on children that I got in touch with the founders to know more about them since they are low key. I believe that fairness dictates that whoever does something notable that positively changes things for the better, it should be acknowledged. In this specific case, they indeed invented the first balance bike for children and today, 100% of every single balance bike you see in every street in the world can be traced to them. These people are in their 60s and just deserve to be respected for what they did. So a page with at the minimum their history and how they had an impact is totally in line with the concept of the encyclopedia: they pioneered a new approach in cycling for children that became a standard.

I understand where you are coming from, but not everyone is a greedy company or a content freelancer willing to do anything to get traffic. NiHuiShan (talk) 02:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Forgive me for being blunt, but I'm not buying that. Being a parent whose kids are using these products isn't even a COI. And everything else you go on to say in no way explains your COI, and instead just makes me think even more that you have some stake in this subject ("These people are in their 60s and just deserve to be respected for what they did" – what?!)

I ask again: what is your relationship with this company and/or its products and/or the people behind it? There is presumably a reason why you chose this as your first and only subject to write about (and not just write, but write in an extremely promotional manner), and why as your very first edit you declared a COI in this matter.

You've also uploaded several images, including product photos and the company's logos, as your own work, meaning you own the copyright in them. Can you explain how that's possible, if you have nothing to do with this subject? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Don'y buy it then, what can I say: the whole piece has be canned anyways so it does not really matter, does it? Have you considered that there are people having some level of awareness about their potential biases and honest enough to acknowledge it when talking about something they are really excited about?

As for why this company and not another topic: please explain to me the motivation of the very first entry for Rolex for instance, clearly not an employee or with any relationship with the company. Why would this contributor do this?

Yes I uploaded images and apparently chose the wrong setting to declare them, as a first time contributor I believe this is an honest mistake. I believe all the images have been equally deleted.

I'll be equally blunt: you've been aggressive all along and this whole discussion seems to be turning into a prosecution of some sort. I suggest we stop right here. And if you are open to feedback, maybe consider to check your own biases: for example when you say "Being a parent whose kids are using these products isn't even a COI" is a strong judgement, and it's appalling that as moderator with a Speedy Deletion power you allow yourself to write this. NiHuiShan (talk) 07:11, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Just to pick up on your last point, I'm not a "moderator", and don't have any "Speedy Deletion power".

And no, having children who use the products in question is not in any sense a COI, not even remotely, and saying that is not a "bias" (whatever that means in this context?). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)