Wikipedia:Drawing board/Archives/2010/March

Blackbook2
This page I create keep's getting deleted, they say it's advertising but I don't think it is!?!?! Can someone look at it and let me know what I am over looking? Thanks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Coral135/Blackbook2 Meow 03:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coral135 (talk • contribs)

Yes, actually it reads exactly like an advert. First off, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, not a simple list of everything under the sun. To be on the site it must be notable! (see Notability) Second, Wikipedia articles need to be neutral. Don't put the company slogan or what the current membership deals are in the article. Simply describe what the site is without promoting it. Lastly, you need THIRD PARTY INDEPENDENT sources! Linking the site does not cut it! If you cannot come up with at least two magazine or newspaper articles, or other independent website sites critiquing it, it does not belong on Wikipedia! Saintlouieb (talk) 05:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Saintlouieb, I tweaked it up a lot, do you think it's good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Coral135/Blackbook2 Meow 01:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coral135 (talk • contribs)

No it still reads like an advertisement! First, if this is your site or if you work for this site, you should not be writing about it. See Avoiding common mistakes Second, as I stated in my last comment, you need INDEPENDENT, THIRD PARTY LINKS! Surely if this site has over 20 million members someone seperate from the site has written about it. That's what needs to be linked in the article, not the site itself. Third, this article was written with a heavy bias for the site. You need to remove statements like, "one of the world's largest, small business Social Networks on-line" and "a unique business model not seen before in the Internet Social Networking Industry." A Wikipedia page does not encourage people to visit websites, it simply informs people what these sites are! This is a very simple fix: find at least two indepentdent sources, quote what they said about the site in the body, link them in your references, remove the site link, remove all wording that promotes the site, then you have a bona-fide, notable, nuetral page! Hope this helps! Saintlouieb (talk) 18:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks again! I tweaked it again, if you don't mind can you have a look? Do you know how I can get blackbook2 unblocked? Meow 00:22, 27 February 2010 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coral135 (talk • contribs)


 * Unfortunately the two new links look like press releases. These are not independent sources.  An independent source will be written without any prompting from the subject, because the writer decided that the topic was worth writing about.  See if you can find something like that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * THANKS Graeme!!! If you have time please take a look again and let me know your thoughts. Do you know how I can get blackbook2 unblocked? Meow 15:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coral135 (talk • contribs)
 * User:Blackbook2 does not look to be blocked, nor has it done anything. If you set an email address you can ask for a new password.  Otherwise it can be totally abandoned as it has no contributions whatsoever. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Mathematics of Sine waves
A new discovery involving Sine waves has been made.! It appears to be a new type of fundamental waveform. Do you want to know more ? Contact link : kpanzout@yahoo.fr  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpanzou (talk • contribs) 12:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Once the discovery is published, and then someone else published on the topic, it will meet the conditions for notability. Otherwise it is original research.  You are permitted to post more details here about a proposed article though! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Help editing an article marked for speedy deletion
Can you please provide guidance as to how I can improve readability so that the article won't be deleted? I have multiple references to demonstrate its notability. Other entries with less information have been posted without a problem. Any assistance and guidance that you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Here is the entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alertsite. WebWonderGal (talk) 04:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There is too much promotionallanguage, terms like: excellent alternative, cost is lower, better support, positive user experience,internationally recognized, next-generation, continues to understand the importance, insight, revenue opportunities are all designed to make the product or its promoters sound good. As a first step you can remove this language and the text of people praising the product.  Remember this is an encyclopedia, so write an encyclopedia article.  Think in 50 years time, what may people want to know about the product? The see also section can also be largely linked from within the text of the article, so that it does not need to be there. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response and great advice. I better understand how it was coming across as promotional. Would you mind looking at the revised entry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alertsite? Any other tweaks that you can recommend? (ie reduce the number of references? revise the original comments from the third-party reviews? deleted the last paragraph?) Any additional insight or guidance that you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! 76.109.251.11 (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC) Well, it's been taken down already. Am I better off with starting with a few sentences with one or two references? Other companies are featured that have similar content to the revised version that was taken down so I am a little unsure of how to best proceed. Would you recommend posting it for peer review as the next best option? I assume that the more postings that I have that are taken down from being promotional, the more trouble it will be to get something posted. Thank you for any additional insight that you can provide. I really appreciate it. 76.109.251.11 (talk) 05:25, 10 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Most of the last version was OK except for this: "AlertSite’s experience is founded on an understanding that web performance and website uptime help to measure customer satisfaction on e-commerce sites. Industry experts rely on AlertSite for its understanding on how new technology enhancements will affect website performance and a company’s revenue opportunities."  If you can rewrite something based on the references in a neutral pov then it should be safe. You can also talk to Ironholds who nominated it as promotion, or Anthony Appleyard the admin who deleted it, about what it would take to keep this article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:47, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Article: Trailing Spouse
Posted on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ausmerica/Trailing_spouse

Feedback requested on first article.

---

The term "Trailing Spouse" is used to describe a person who follows his or her life partner to another city because of a work assignment. The term is often associated with people involved in an expatriate assignment but is also used by academia on domestic assignments.

The earliest citation of the term Trailing Spouse is attributed to Mary Bralove in the Wall Street Journal (July 15, 1981) in an article titled “Problems of Two-Career Families Start Forcing Businesses to Adapt” p. 29: Another personnel man remembers the promising executive he lost because her husband was a dentist who couldn’t find a good practice to join in the area. To cope with this problem, some 150 northern New Jersey employers participate in an employer job bank. The bank is designed to provide job leads for “the trailing spouse” of a newly hired or transferred executive.

The phenomena of expat Trailing Spouses is most apparent in the military, diplomatic, and other government communities as well as the private sector where the employer regularly re-assigns their employees to new locations. In each case, the Trailing Spouse is required to relocate and as a result faces a range of issues that impact their personal and working lives.

Issues facing trailing spouses
Dual-career challenges - Whereby the Trailing Spouse suspends or gives up their career to follow the lead partner on their assignment.

Family issues - Stresses caused by social, financial and cultural strains placed on the family relationships as a result of the assignment.

Barriers to mobility - The willingness or otherwise of the Trailing Spouse or other family members to relocate. Lack of support by the sponsoring employer to address the needs of the Trailing Spouse.

Work/Life challenges - Difficulties associated with finding and maintaining meaningful work or other sense of worth while on assignments.

Research into the Trailing Spouse phenomena
"2005 Trailing Spouse Survey: Findings of a 4-year study of accompanying spouse issues on international assignments"

Yvonne McNulty is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Australia. In May 2005 she completed a research study and published an 80-page survey containing findings from the 4-year study of Trailing Spouse issues on international assignments which completed a project as part of a much larger study conducted at Southern Cross University, Australia.

From the executive summary of the 2005 Trailing Spouse Survey:

The costs associated with global mobility are high, with some evidence suggesting that the costs exceed $1 million per assignee, per assignment, and that the total cost to multinational corporations could be as high as $75 billion a year. The continued reporting of international assignment failures only adds to the costs, with 44% of MNCs reporting failures in the Asia Pacific region and 63% reporting failures in Europe. As a result two trends are emerging amongst employers looking for ways to justify the continued use of their international mobility programs: (1) obtaining an expatriate return on investment, and (2) developing global talent management programs for international assignees. Yet, another more critical issue impacts both of these emerging trends: the influence of the trailing spouse on assignment success. It has been clearly demonstrated by industry surveys that ‘family issues’ is the number one reason why international assignments are declined. ‘Family issues’ is also the main cause of assignment failure. But what, exactly, are these familyissues? And what can HR practitioners do to address these concerns?