User talk:Jack Hobson

Welcome!
Hello, Jack Hobson, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Hobson Manufacturing, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 99.136.254.88 (talk) 00:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Hobson Manufacturing


A tag has been placed on Hobson Manufacturing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 00:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


 * If I can add a bit of explanation to the above notice... The article doesn't (1) indicate why the company is the important, and (2) cite independent sources that verify the importance.  As it stands now, an administrator will delete the article.  But I have asked them to copy your work thus far to a page in your user space.  This will allow you (or perhaps others) to further develop the draft.

I personally thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia, and want to help new editors in any way possible. Please write to me on my talk page if you have any questions. Senator2029 ➔leave me a message 01:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator, I deleted the article. I am not copying it to you workspace, because in my opinion totally unusable and needs to be rewritten from scratch. It might be possible, if the company is in fact notable, according to our requirements.

First of all, a Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. Even if the company is important, for the sort of parts manufacturer it appears to be, this may be difficult, because there are unlikely to be product reviews. You may therefore have to depend on articles written about the company, and ones not based on press releases are unlikely to be available unless the company is indeed a leader in its market: that's essentially what you need to show. If you have this material, go ahead; otherwise, there's no point, for it will not be possible to write an acceptable article until you do have them. A Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't advocate for the organization, say what they are and what they  have accomplished. Remember not to copy from a web site, even your own -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you own the copyright and are willing to give us permission according to WP:DCM (permission that irrevocably gives everyone in the world the right to copy, reuse, and modify the material), the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable. (Thus, there is generally no purpose in giving permission; it is better to rewrite.)

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients--that sort of content is considered promotional. Do not address the reader in the second person: encyclopedias are impersonal and descriptive. Avoid making promotional statements, such as "We strive to bridge the abilities of people and technology to help us all get the job done." or "We look forward to working with you." You cannot say in general something like "hroughout the years Hobson has been approved by virtually every major aerospace and military company" You rather have to give references saying just whom is using it--one or two major examples is enough--do not try to be exhaustive. Don't list every product in the infobox--it's enough to say: electronic parts and fasteners.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know. If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity. I would suggest that you use the WP:AFC process, via the WP:Article Wizard. It's designed to guide you to a sustainable article.  DGG ( talk ) 05:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)