User talk:Luckmed

Ways to improve Ribordy Watches
Hi, I'm Pmaccabe. Luckmed, thanks for creating Ribordy Watches!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This page seems to be primarily promotional although some time and care was taken in writing it. Wikipedia general notability guideline is that a topic should have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Phil (talk) 12:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Working together on ways to improve Ribordy Watches
Hi Pmaccabe. Thank you for helping me improve my recently created Ribordy Watches!

Can you help me understand what content comes across as primarily promotional? I read a few approved Wikipedia articles on brands and companies to get a feeling of how I can talk about the company without promoting it before writing this article. I must admit, there are plenty of articles on Wikipedia talking about brands in exactly the same format. The body of information I was most unsure about was prices. Would removing information on prices make a significant change?

Thanks so much for your guidance.


 * I'd say removing the pricing helps for sure. In its current state I'd say the issue is more lack of sources showing the significant/notability of the company. As I see it that can be related to it being promotional, if there aren't significant third-party sources, news coverage of the company, etc. setting up a Wikipedia page that is just a description and a link to a company site is a bit inherently promotional, leveraging Wikipedia's traffic to raise this company's visibility. That however is my personal feeling and on the other hand I like to err on the side of being inclusionist which is why I didn't tag it for speedy deletion or anything. I'm just one guy though and my views shouldn't have undue influence, so I think at this point I'll let how I tagged it be most of my say and recommend you maybe solicit other opinions and advice, maybe at Teahouse on how to proceed. I'm glad you are committed to working to make sure it meets Wikipedia's content guidelines that is what it takes to be a good contributor. Phil (talk) 14:15, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ribordy Watches


The article Ribordy Watches has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails WP:NORG. No SIGCOV, the first source is about another company, the other two sources are self generated, article appears promotional in nature."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rogermx (talk) 21:41, 2 July 2020 (UTC)