User talk:Timginger

Your submission at Articles for creation: Social Responsibility Score (February 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 User4edits 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 after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Social Responsibility Score and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:Social_Responsibility_Score Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:User4edits&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Social_Responsibility_Score reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

User4edits (talk) 05:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi there - the article was updated with citations and references but has since been deleted. I don't even have a copy of it anywhere. Can you help please? Thanks Timginger (talk) 11:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Reply
Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, you must follow the guidance below:
 * 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 or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or 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
 * Your text was largely unreferenced, and the refs you did give were either directly associated with the project or quoting the chair of Glow, not independent third-party sources
 * In the absence of any independent coverage ,and a great deal more discussion than actual facts, it's difficult to see how this meets our notability criteria. We need significant coverage in independent, multiple, reliable, secondary sources. Note that an individual source must meet all the criteria to be counted towards notability.


 * You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.
 * Lots of unsupported claims presented as fact, so at paragraph two we have SRS provides a repeatable interview methodology that allows trained practitioners to determine whether the Subject of the interview is perceived to be meeting its social and environmental responsibility expectations. The methodology is simple in its approach, with a single question at its core. Its concise nature makes it relatively easy to use...


 * There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
 * You had multiple spamlinks including an application link.


 * 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.
 * I didn't check, but the combination of very few references, almost no wikilinks and unencyclopaedic text raises concerns.

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.

I see that admin has kindly restored the text to you, but please read what I have posted above carefully before you try again. The draft needs, i think, to be rewritten from scratch, with real references and facts and a neutral encyclopaedic tone Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Solid. Thanks Timginger (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC)