User talk:Raptorsquad

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (November 21)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gbawden 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 User:Raptorsquad/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gbawden (talk) 13:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't believe that the company is notable - it is just another company. See the notability requirements at WP:NCORP. Also the promotional aspects raised by another reviewer have not been addressed Gbawden (talk) 17:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Incognito Worldwide India (December 22)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister 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:Incognito Worldwide India and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister  talk  19:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * More may be found here.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  22:36, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

One of the remarks I received from those offering advise, which I do greatly appreciate, cited articles he thought would establish notability. But those are the exact article I did list, and it is still being dismissed; one comment was that they didn't accept paid advertising -- BUT I NEVER PAID FOR THOSE ARTICLES. So I remain confused as to what they editors want, and discouraged from contributing to Wiki.

Raptorsquad (talk) 13:16, 25 February 2017 (UTC) [[User talk:Raptorsquad| talk 19:07, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Incognito Worldwide
I saw your post on the Wikipedia Helpdesk and noticed that the volunteers failed to provide you with concrete advice. For what it is worth, here are some tips and tricks that might help you out

If you want to have your article accepted, you will need to focus on two core things: reliable sources and notability of the subject. Here follow some notes about these:

Reliable sources See secondary sources; WP:RS / WP:RELIABLE

Wiki editors are just crazy about reliable sources. In general this means references to academic articles, text books and reputable magazines/ newspapers. WP editors prefer sources that have some kind of moderation or fact checking in place - that is, where articles are checked by senior editors or legal people prior to publication. Wikipedia editors are deeply suspicious of primary sources (corporate websites, company media releases, company biographies) and they also hate some secondary sources notably blogs, personal biographies that might have been written by the subject or his/her family or colleagues. In short, they hate anything at all that lacks objectivity or could sound promotional in character. It's crazy because about 70% of all business news is heavily influenced by corporate copy via media releases etc - so the newspaper article is often similar or identical to the corporate news release. BUT at Wikipedia, commentary will pass without comment if it comes from a reputable paper such as the New York Times yet will attract very close scrutiny if it comes from a company media release.

Notability See notable and WP:ORG/ WP:COMPANY Articles about companies do not automatically get accepted into Wikipedia. The organisation must satisfy WP's notability criteria for companies. If you have any chance of getting your article accepted by Wikipedia, you will need to establish notability. This means that the company must have received significant news coverage in independent, reliable sources such as newspapers, TV coverage etc

Look for things like the the company:
 * being recipient of an award or accolade (e.g. an advertising award)
 * being ranked in some kind of official corporate ranking scheme (e.g. green consumer rankings, Forbes Top 500 companies list, Nielsen's top 100 brands, top tech companies)
 * having a notable person as CEO, CFO or CMO (but persons must also satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria as well)
 * being involved in some kind of legal test case or legal precedent
 * being involved in some kind of controversy that generated positive or negative press coverage (e.g. a PR crisis, a social media storm)
 * being engaged in some innovative business practice or process (but innovative must be a description used by an independent source)
 * as a generous philanthropist (giving to charities), or benefactor (of the arts, sports, community groups) (as above - generous must be a descriptive term used by an independent source)

A few events/ sources that you can use in your article

I did a quick search and found the following that might be helpful for your article:


 * Named start up of the month, August, 2014 See: http://inwwc.com/company/news/item/277-incognito-worldwide-named-startup-of-the-month (this is a blog which Wiki editors tend to regard as unreliable, so it would be even better if you could find the original article in Silicone India


 * Named one of the most promising companies for 2015 See: http://www.siliconindia.com/magazine-articles-in/Most_Promising_Marketing_Companies__2015_-DJLS882303349.html


 * Selected by Insight Success Magazine to their list of ‘Top 20 Consulting Companies.’ See: http://insightssuccess.in/incognito-worldwide-transcending-digital-branding-with-inventiveness/ and http://www.intechcreative.com/index.php/news/itemlist/tag/incognito%20worldwide


 * General corporate information (from independent source) See: http://www.siliconindia.com/magazine-articles-in/Incognito_Worldwide_Believing_in_Being_the_Best_Not_Just_Good-GYDR676665602.html

How to find independent, reliable sources (i.e. sources that are not from the company)

(You can vary the Google search by using specific terms e.g. In Google, replace "News" with "Award" and see what comes up or simply add "Award" to both "Incognito Worldwide" and "News". You usually have to experiment with this - but the approach generally yields good results.)
 * Do a search of local newspapers e.g. find reputable local titles and search their news archives for any mention of the company
 * Do a Google Advanced search (https://www.google.com/advanced_search) and use terms like "Incognito Worldwide" in one line and "News" in another line.
 * Can you translate articles that might have been written in a local language? (faithful translations are permissable for Wikipedia)
 * Go to your local library and search one of the finding guides such as ABI/Inform and also search one of the company directories such as Jobsons (ask your librarian for assistance if you have not used these before)

BronHiggs (talk) 03:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I get what your'e saying, but I provided three magazines, and the one article on the website I listed shows the magazine cover and article because it was not an online magazine, it was a print publication. What no one has told me though I've asked over and over is, how many articles does it take to be notable? I felt the nature of the rise of this company was different and interesting, but just now feel as though i am wasting my time trying to get anything published on Wiki. They won't approve anything I list, yet I come across articles on here with countless factual errors. Very frustrating. This is the second article I have attempted to publish with the same result -- the first one was a TV commentary that has been on TV or over 15 years commentating as a legal analyst on some of the biggest legal cases in the USA. She apparently wasn't notable either. I guess I'll just stick to magazine reporting and writing columns.