User talk:JANECARRMEDIA/Jane carr (brand)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I was asked by User:Peridon to take a look at this article and make suggestions.

I have to tell you, the article needs a lot of work before it is ready to go into Wikipedia's mainspace. New articles are always subjected to a peer review process by other editors, and if they find it has problems they can propose it for deletion. Here are some of the problems that this article will face, with Wikipedia links so you can read more about them:
 * The main hurdle is demonstrating that the subject is notable or famous enough to have a page in Wikipedia. To prove notability, there has to have been significant coverage about the subject in independent reliable sources. "Independent" means third-party sources unrelated to the company (in other words, not press releases, and not the company's own website). "Reliable sources" mostly means published journalism, not blogs or anonymous sources. Most of your links are not independent and thus don't qualify, but the two articles in Vogue and possibly the listing in London Fashion Week could help the company pass the notability test. At this point those are the ONLY reliable source references in the article. (The Japan Times is also a reliable source, but that article does not mention Jane Carr that I could find, and thus it does nothing to establish notability.)
 * The second problem is that the article is written like an advertisement. The tone has to be completely factual and neutral, not promotional.
 * The third problem is conflict of interest. It is obvious that you, the author of the page, work for the company and are trying to promote it. While this is not a reason to delete the page in itself, it makes other editors very suspicious that your intention is advertising rather than writing a real encyclopedia article.

With that in mind, let me give you some specific suggestions for improving this article so that it will be accepted as a Wikipedia page.
 * Get rid of the all-capital-letters in section headings and in references to the company. And stop saying JANE CARR, JANE CARR, JANE CARR in every sentence. Mention the company name occasionally, and then say "the company" or something of the sort.
 * Evaluate what it is about the company that makes it "notable" - namely, recognition by outside parties, prizes the company has won, anything that makes it the biggest in some category, etc. Then put that notability information in the first paragraph.
 * Also in the first paragraph, put identifying and localizing information. For example " Jane Carr is a maker of luxury fashion accessories based in London, England. It was founded by British fashion designer Jane Carr in 2005. "
 * You mention a prize, the Secretariat prize. That could help to establish Carr's notability. See if you can find an internet link to verify that she got the prize, and add it to the article as a reference.
 * Get rid of the entire section "Jane Carr Collections". Wikipedia is not a catalog.
 * Trim the sections on history and collaborations way back. Bring out the actual company history (when it was founded, when it went into e-commerce, etc.). Don't name every launch. Don't describe every item.
 * Eliminate most of the reference links to the company's website. They are clutter, and they tend to obscure the REAL references to outside sources, which are needed to establish notability.
 * If you can find additional mentions of the company by independent WP:Reliable Sources - reviews, business news stories, etc. - add them to the article. To search for such stories, go to the Google news archive. Look only for articles in actual published media - and the more prestigious the publication, the better. Anything significant in the Guardian or the Times or Paris Match or similar publications would almost guarantee notability, whereas London Fashion Week doesn't do much for you.
 * Get rid of flowery descriptive language like "lush", "winter fantasy", etc. This is called peacockery, meaning showoffish. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia, and it makes a very poor impression on the other editors who will be judging the article.
 * "External links" should list only the company's website - not the facebook and twitter pages.

I hope you don't think this evaluation is harsh! I do think the company may be notable enough, but the article will only be accepted if it is encyclopedic in tone and if it demonstrates to everyone's satisfaction that the company is important enough to deserve a page here.

You are smart to be developing it in the privacy of your namespace. You can take all the time you want here to make it right. Once you launch it into mainspace, it will come under critical scrutiny immediately.

I will "watch" this page, so if you want to comment or ask me questions, you can do it here. --MelanieN (talk) 16:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:JANECARRMEDIA/Jane carr (brand)


A tag has been placed on User:JANECARRMEDIA/Jane carr (brand), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising,. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —teb728 t c 03:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Your username
Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that the username you have chosen (JANECARRMEDIA) seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of a group, company or website.

There are two issues with this :
 * 1) It is possible that you have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, you must exercise great caution when editing on topics related to your organization or adding links to its website.
 * 2) Your account cannot represent a group of people. You may wish to create a new account with a username that represents only you. Alternatively, you may consider changing your username to avoid giving the impression that your personal account is being used for promotional purposes.

Regardless of whether you change your name or create a new account, you are not exempted from the guidelines concerning editing where you have a conflict of interest. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. —teb728 t c 03:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)