User talk:Wburnette

Deletion
Mine was actually the fourth deletion. I've seen your message, But I'm just about to log out for the evening, I'll have a look and reply tomorrow  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  20:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, the problems that led to previous deletions still remain
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Although you gave references, most were closely affiliated to or could be edited by the company, or, like the customer numbers, are unsourced.
 * it's all about what you are trying to sell, little about the company itself other than a location and sales figures. How many employees? Is that all its history?
 * It is written as an advertisement, consisting mainly of a list of products (all bolded contra MoS, spammy in itself). Wikipedia isn't intended to give you a platform to list your wares. The descriptions are written in sales talk unified solutions, and none are referenced to independent sources, so we can't decide whether they (as opposed to the company itself) are notable enough to mention, or whether they are accurately described
 * The list of partners is pointless (and unsourced) spam. Their notability doesn't transfer to Infoblox, and it's sort of we hang out with the big boys (if they are)
 * You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

Basically, the article is written as a display cabinet for your products. Even if the company meets the notability criteria, the article needs more balance and less of the product list + customer list presentation.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:28, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Items like location to Santa Clara and the attacks on DNS servers are not in themselves promotional, and give some background, which is what you need. If Cricket Liu has his own article, then link to it, otherwise pointless, also avoid peacockery like "noted expert", "most critical"

The main problem is the lists of products and partners. Lists are never a good idea even as a style thing, and lists of products, partners, awards or honours basically wave a flag saying "This is spam". Integrate what is essential into the text or possibly a table. Consider using a table for things you must list (I helped a big cement company tabulate their production plants, more concise and neater than a list).

You could use some pictures (of the company, not the products) but take care, the images must be public domain, so if they have been published elsewhere, like the company website, they will not be accepted. Images of the products should be avoided. Basically, the more verifiable hard facts and background you can get in the better, and the bolded product lists (essentially a sales list without the prices) and partners need to be made less obviously. Have a look at KFC, which admittedly has a lot more history, but might give some ideas.

It might be worth mentioning a few (NOT a list) significant clients, such as government agencies or major international companies, with refs  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:10, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand that you have modelled this on other articles, but there are a lot of company articles that have crept under the net.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll be in India for the second half of January, but fine otherwise  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  18:15, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I made these changes. Most are MoS, fixing capitalisation, adding more links etc, but look at the first two refs. I've rearranged as. It only takes a few seconds, since you are just reversing the order and adding the square brackets, but looks more professional. If you enable WikiEd in Preferences, you can see what you are doing easier. Also see ref 14 where I've rolled together two refs using, Instead of just ref=. Subsequent occurrences, you just put.

In terms of content, I get no idea of how many people are employed. That would be helpful, and perhaps the size (floor area?) of your offices. Although the text is better, it could do with those types of facts to balance the "what we do" stuff which is always going to be carefully scrutinised. An image would be good (but see my comments above about copyright), and you could add your logo to the infobox. You would need to add a fair use or ineligible for copyright rationale (see File:Tesco Logo.svg for the latter), and upload only to Wikipedia, not Commons.

I think at some stage, you are just going to have to post and see what happens. If it gets tagged, ask the editor what you need to do. Don't forget to add categories when you post, cheers,  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:31, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * If the images are not stated to be your own, they will either have to be clearly labelled as public domain on the company's website (which someone will check anyway), or you will need an OTRS ticket  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  19:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Infoblox was accepted
 Infoblox, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Chris1834 (talk) 18:45, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.