User talk:Njduckw1

Requested username: njduckw1

Request reason: would like to suggest edits to company page via 'suggest an edit' function

Please provide your response to your block: thought I was being transparent when signing up with company name to suggest factual edits but now realise that I needed to sign up differently. Would still like to propose minor factual edits and links to external sources to for the Genomics plc page (which has disappeared - is this related to my being blocked).

Genomics plc (talk) 15:37, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Genomics plc (talk) 08:19, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I have globally renamed Genomics plc to Njduckw1, and someone else will review your unblock request. I also took a look at the deleted Genomics plc article, and it was written more like a promotional/marketing document than a disinterested encyclopedia article - your minor edit was not responsible for that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:45, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Njduckw1 (talk) 09:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Boing! said Zebedee
Thank you for unblocking and changing my username. Do you know how I can re-instate the original Genomics plc page? It was created before my time and the company would like to continue to have a presence on Wikipedia. Njduckw1 (talk) 09:51, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Comments
Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest, which I've moved to your user page, as is required. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you choose to do so, please write initially as a draft

Also read the following regarding writing an article
 * you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls. Many of the references were not acceptable, or were nothing to do with the article.
 * The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:
 * significant coverage in
 * independent,
 * multiple,
 * reliable,
 * secondary sources.
 * Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability. Lack of notability as so defined was one reason for deletion. A large chunk of the article was potted biographies of the founders, irrelevant and also pointless since both are linked to their own Wikipedia articles


 * you must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Most of your lead was promoting what the company does, but to show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits. Stuff like vast amounts of human genetic and phenotypic data from many sources... save the pharmaceutical and biotech industry billions of dollars is just promo.
 * there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
 * you must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article.

Usually people who are blocked for username violations either stay blocked, or only unblocked on condition that they don't write about their companies, so you have been fortunate to avoid either fate, However, that doesn't mean you can write what you like. Read the text above carefully, write as a draft, and ask if you are not sure what you are doing Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:43, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

More
Apologies, now done. I made these edits, please ask if you don't understand the reason for any of the changes. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:36, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Your references need improving. The UK government one is fine, but the others are either press releases, associated with Genomics, or both. You need independent third-party sources, not interviews with your management or company PR releases.
 * I'm not sure you have done enough to show notability; the government case study is good, but otherwise the amounts of money and company size aren't huge by modern standards. You need to show more genuine independent commentary, rather than the company telling us about itself; I don't think the UK Gov ref is sufficient on its own
 * You need publishers for your refs, I've done one

Your submission at Articles for creation: Genomics plc (December 12)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HighKing was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Genomics plc and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Genomics plc, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Genomics_plc Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HighKing&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Genomics_plc reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 HighKing++ 16:31, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Genomics plc


Hello, Njduckw1. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Genomics plc".

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. CptViraj (📧) 06:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)