Pepelux71

Your submission at Articles for creation: ScoresPro (June 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. 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, you can find it at Draft:ScoresPro.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• Please remember to link to the submission!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Pepelux71, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:ScoresPro

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:ScoresPro, 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, product, group, service or person 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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:28, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:ScoresPro (June 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

.

• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• Please remember to link to the submission!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

78.26 (His Wiki's Voice) 16:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Pepelux71. You have new messages at 78.26's talk page.
Message added 13:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

78.26 (His Wiki's Voice) 13:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

draftscorepro

I am not convinced that the company meets the notability guidelines, but leaving that to one side, nearly all the text consists of unsourced claims about the product phrased in a promotional tone, such as What makes this method special. However, I take the point that the article is still under review, so I've restored and added it to my watchlist. In my view it needs much more improvement than the reviewer is suggesting to avoid speedy deletion at a future date Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

And another admin has deleted it. I think you just have to accept that it is nowhere near neutral enough in its current form. I can sandbox the deleted text for you if you want to try to deal with problems out of the line of fire Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanations. Kindly drop it in sandbox if possible. Pepelux71 (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)