Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2023 January 21

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation | Help desk | Archives
Help desk
< January 20 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 22 >
Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


January 21

edit

02:01:26, 21 January 2023 review of submission by SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES

edit

I am completely confused by your notes. You are saying that the draft reads like an Advertisement, not an Encyclopedia but to me it is the exact opposite. There is only factual substance and no "fluff". It is also completely neutral just facts. All the sources were independent, published reliable and in depth. A holding company purchasing subsidiaries are not routine business announcements. It shows the companies business structure and what they do. The article also lists the key people, its address, and Nasdaq information. I'm just at a loss. SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES (talk) 02:01, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES, your sources are press releases. Not a single source is independently written. Press releases do not establish notability. Routine business transactions such as acquisitions, also do not contribute to establishing notability. That may all be factual information, but Wikipedia is not a business directory. WP:NCORP lays out Wikipedia's definition of notability for Corporations and will be of help as to sourcing. As to advertising, it's not a blatant we sell this, buy here (which would be ground for deletion, rather than a declination). What I meant there is that it's using the companies words and claims via Press releases which are promotional material. Slywriter (talk) 03:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources ,2 ,4 ,5 ,9 ,10 ,11 ,12 ,13 Are not press releases from the company and they are independent. Some additional information is from press releases and some other information comes from company auditor information and they have a duty to be independent. You would be surprised at how many companies which are already on Wikipedia get media article coverage because they pay for advertising or they pay the authors/editors. I also put most of the information into my own words and did not copy it from what I cited from. It is sad because the company is noteworthy for many reasons. First company to mass produce a solid state battery. First company to put it into a commercial product. They hold many patents. RCA Commercial is a portion of the legacy brand company. Vayu Aerospace drones are used to protect our countries nuclear missles. The difficulty I have inputting real information into Wikipedia makes me think maybe Wikipedia isn't a good source of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES (talk • contribs) 06:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES No, Wikipedia isn't "a good source of information", see Wikipedia is not a reliable source and the general disclaimer. Wikipedia can be vandalized; Wikipedia can have incorrect information either inadvertently or deliberately; there are many reasons Wikipedia should not be trusted. No one should trust Wikipedia blindly; they should examine the sources provided to determine their validity and accuracy.
Wikipedia is not a place to merely document the existence of a company and what it does. If this company was the first to produce a solid state battery, we need independent reliable sources that discuss that fact- paid for stories and press releases are not independent. See other stuff exists; it is possible for inappropriate content and sources to get by us, we can only address what we know about. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, we can and do miss things, this does not mean other inappropriate content should be allowed. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
About the sources you mention in the current version:
  • 2 is a market data summary at the news agency Reuters
  • 4 is a press release (a minimally rewritten version of this, see churnalism)
  • 5 is a press release
  • 9 is from seekingalpha.com, which is categorised as "generally unreliable" – and it is a press release, original version here
  • 10 is about an unrelated topic, and Alpine 4 Holdings is not mentioned
  • 11 is another press release regurgitated by seekingalpha
  • 12 is another version of the PR in source 11
  • 13 is a press release
So there you have it.--bonadea contributions talk 10:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is all true then you can say the same about this company and it should be taken down QuantumScape. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES (talk • contribs) 12:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES: If you re-read the response you got from 331dot above, you'll find that this exact point was addressed there. --bonadea contributions talk 13:09, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not following please clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES (talk • contribs) 13:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SOLIDSTATEBATTERIES I will restate what I said; See other stuff exists; it is possible for inappropriate content and sources to get by us, we can only address what we know about. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, we can and do miss things, this does not mean other inappropriate content should be allowed.
We are only as good as our volunteers and the time they have to spend locating and addressing inappropriate information. If you would like to help out in identifying inappropriate articles for possible action, please do, we need the help. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've marked QuantumScape as being problematic and needing attention, thank you. 331dot (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13:35:58, 21 January 2023 review of submission by Franklinerobe

edit


Franklinerobe (talk) 13:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Franklinerobe: You do not ask a question, but Draft:Syed Fardeen has been rejected which means that it will not be considered further. Previously, it had been declined five times in less than 24 hours, and you had not even attempted to fix the issues described by the reviewers. --bonadea contributions talk 14:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17:19:21, 21 January 2023 review of submission by 39.32.196.195

edit


39.32.196.195 (talk) 17:19, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't ask a question, but your draft was rejected, meaning that it will not be considered further. 331dot (talk) 17:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19:39:19, 21 January 2023 review of submission by User345627

edit

I would like to upload this article because I really look up to Chloé Prinsloo and she has impacted my life for the better, so I thought it would be great to upload an article on Wikipedia about her.

User345627 (talk) 19:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@User345627 Wikipedia has guidelines and requirements on notability for the creation of articles for people - you can view these guidelines here for more information. Meszzy2 (talk) 19:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User345627 If you just want to tell the world about this person, that's precisely what social media is for. There are also other wiki-type projects with less stringent requirements. Wikipedia article summarize what independent reliable sources say about a person- and you offer none in this draft. That's why it was rejected and will not be considered any more. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2023_January_21&oldid=1135831497"