User talk:Bcourter

Not quite ready
In my opinion, your article (here) is not quite ready to move into article space. I'll explain why, and remove the request to move this article into article space. Other editors may feel differently, so if you disagree with my reasons, feel free to replace the template, and someone else may move it for you.

It is important for Wikipedia articles to have references to reliable sources. While you have some items labeled as references, they are not formed as they should be. As a guide to including references properly, please see Citing sources and footnotes. Please add some references in the correct form to support the factual claims in the draft article.

One of the important requirements of an article in Wikipedia is that it demonstrate the Notability of the topic. (While this is a guideline, not an absolute requirement and exceptions can occur, they are rare.) I don't feel this article has demonstrated the notability of the topic. This can be accomplished by adding references to reliable sources which support the notability of the topic.-- SPhilbrick  T  19:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

New version
I'm looking at the sandbox version of the Spaceclaim article. I'm having trouble telling Spaceclaim Corp from its software offerings. Are you looking to making this article about your company or the software? It can be about both, but we'll have to work on making it clear when talking about one or the other. —  f c s u p e r ( How's That?, That's How! ) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 05:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I've cleaned up the intro paragraph and provided a third party source. This should be up to Wikipedia standards.  Before the article is recreated, I suggest three more sections: Products, Modelling methodology and History.  One paragraph each for now (keep it short).  It helps to keep point of view in mind.  How can a statement be made so as keep a neutral point of view?  Statements about company goals are generally considered poor additions and will often be removed, even if it is sourced.  Example, bad "Company X revolutionized the industry last year".  Example, OK: "Company X revenue grew 100% over the past year."  I'd like to create this article as an engineering related stub.  It will be less likely to be submitted for AfD if it is declared as a stub.  Also, it should be added and edited by a third party.  Companies that edit their own articles are technically in violation of the terms of use.  Additionally, what published sources to you currently know about that have articles about SpaceClaim?  Published sources gets more respect than blogs. —  f c s u p e r ( How's That?, That's How! ) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) —  18:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I've worked on the Products section and History section. These sections should be OK, though I want to clean up the ref sources in the History section a bit more.  I'm not sure how to address the Tech section yet.  It may be better to leave this section out (at least for now while you are trying to get the article created). —  f c s u p e r ( How's That?, That's How! ) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) —  21:18, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Bcourter/SpaceClaim


Hello, Bcourter. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "SpaceClaim".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. DannyS712 (talk) 07:19, 2 December 2018 (UTC)