Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2017 July 12

= July 12 =

06:34:58, 12 July 2017 review of submission by Maniksha.sharma
I have written something on Raw Pressery but I got a feedback saying that some part of the content is promotional. Please help me in understanding which part of the content looks promotional and it would be a great help if someone please assist me in framing a proper non-advertisement or non-promotional content for Raw Pressery. I

Maniksha.sharma (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, Maniksha. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.  Our apologies for the delay in response.  I see that you've already received some advice from the reviewer who declined you submission.  But you didn't ask that reviewer about promotional-ism, so I'll comment on that here.  We at Wikipedia use the word "promotional" in a broader sense than you might imagine.  Although we use it to mean content that looks like an advertisement for a company or product, we also use it to mean content that looks like it merely duplicates what one might find on a company's web site.  And that's the problem that I see with your draft -- it really doesn't give the reader anything more than routine information.  All companies exist, all manufacturers get their raw materials from somewhere, and all companies get their financing from one source or another (and there is rarely anything encyclopedic about the particular source of financing).  I do note, however, that the Business Insider (India) piece does approach the subject in something more than routine fashion.  If you can assemble two or three more substantive pieces that provide a similar type of independent discussion of the company, you might be well on the way to developing a useful article.  I hope this response has been helpful.  If you have any questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:15, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hey NewYorkActuary,

Thanks for feedback.

I have rewritten the article based on your feedback. I would appreciate if you can review it and share your feedback with me.

Here, is the revised copy: Raw Pressery believes in delivering 100% natural flavour and no preservatives in their juices, cleanses and smoothies. Starting off as a cold-pressed juice company located in Mumbai, India, they have also branched out into soups.These juices are produced by Rakyan Beverages Pvt Ltd using high-processing technology. All products manufactured by the brand have a strict no artificial colouring and sugar policy.

Please do let me know your thoughts on this.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maniksha.sharma (talk • contribs) 07:30, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello again, Maniksha. Removing the details about financing was a step in the right direction.  But you are still facing the much larger task of demonstrating that the company has received substantial coverage from reliable independent sources.  And for that, you'll need more than that single Business Insider (India) article.  If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:51, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 08:58:27, 12 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Mrngcuegee
Dear Help Desk,

My page received several submission rejections and the reason is "Primary Schools are not Notable", "only Secondary Schools and Universities are notable", etc. I do not understand the unfairness to this judgement. I have tried to follow the Wikipedia guidelines to the best of my knowledge but am still receiving criticisms as such. There are Primary School pages in existent as a matter of fact and they seem to be "safe".

Could you please enlighten me?

Thank you in advance for your reply.

Yours,

Mrngcuegee

Mrngcuegee (talk) 08:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, essentially Wikipedia's policy on the inclusion of schools has recently changed. It used to be the fact that any secondary school, as long as it could be proven to exist was worthy of a Wikipedia article. Now all schools have to show they are notable- i.e. covered by newspapers, media reports etc., and existing schools are slowly being gone through to check that they comply with the new policy. As another reviewer, Worldbruce, wrote, the relevant notability guideline is WP:ORG. Being large, old, or growing does not demonstrate that a school is notable. Significant coverage in independent reliable sources is what proves that a school is notable. jcc (tea and biscuits) 13:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 17:14:10, 12 July 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Amido3
I submit a draft and there is feedback. I would like to delete it. How can I do it?

Amido3 (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Place at the top of the page. jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:39, 12 July 2017 (UTC)