User talk:Anastasia (Nastia)

This is Anastasia (Nastia)'s talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: OnePageCRM (October 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Alpha3031 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:OnePageCRM 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anastasia (Nastia)! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alpha3031, thank you for taking the time to review my draft.

Could you please help me better understand how I can improve it before re-submitting?

I removed anything promotional and added several independent and reliable sources that mention OnePageCRM. Forbes and Forbes Advisor covered OnePageCRM as well as The Irish Independent, The Times, Local Enterprise Ireland Office, and also TechCrunch.

Some of them are globally known (Forbes and TechCrunch). Others are well known and established in Ireland, like Chambers Ireland, the federation of chambers of commerce for the Republic of Ireland, that officially endorsed OnePageCRM on their website (the link is provided in the references).

Pipedrive has a similar number of references - https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Pipedrive

Another Wiki article has no reputable references but is still published - https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Really_Simple_Systems

Could you please let me know how I can improve the draft to get it published? I'd appreciate your feedback. Anastasia (Nastia) (talk) 09:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anastasia, I see Theroadislong has also provided some feedback, and I would agree with their comment that we would primarily look at awards that have Wikipedia articles already. Additionally, for an article about a company or organisation, in most cases even if we had those types of awards, the sources still need to pass the criteria.

Regarding my own assessment of the sources, to start with Forbes, unfortunately Forbes Contributor and Advisor articles are generally not considered suitable for use on Wikipedia, due to differences in editorial standards compared to staff written articles. I do see you have added a few new articles from the Times as well, I will review those articles when able, and let you know once I have done so.

As for the two articles you've linked on other CRM software, they were created a long time ago, and unfortunately the criteria for organisations, companies and products have tightened up a lot since then. I can tell you immediately that they would not be accepted for publication today if the sources in the article are all that exist. The reason those arm ticles are still published is because once published, articles do not get re-reviewed frequently (after all, re-reviewing all 6 million articles regularly would be a significant time sink). Those articles will most likely be deleted if no additional sources could be found. Alpha3031 (t • c) 00:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so one thing I'll want to note about these sources is that they're mostly interviews. You can see an essay with more detailed guidance at Wikipedia:Interviews, but the gist of it is that while interviews published in reliable sources can be used to support content in an article in an WP:ABOUTSELF manner, they're not suitable to write the whole article from. There are two tests for independence in the criteria (WP:ORGIND), independence of the author and of the content, and interviews for the most part fail the second of those tests. This will likely apply to the Guardian podcast as well.

The Webb article (that's ref 23 for now) on the other hand, that paragraph talks about Fitzgerald heading out on a tour. There are multiple reasons why we wouldn't consider that to meet the criteria, it's somewhat routine coverage, there's little if any secondary evaluation or analysis, and with short blurbs like this, whether it meets WP:ORGIND is also a little doubtful.

The best thing to do would be to avoid interviews and articles primarily composed of quotations and near-quotations, and find a few sources (usually we recommend 3) that clearly meet the 4 criteria mentioned in the template above. Alpha3031 (t • c) 01:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:OnePageCRM has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:OnePageCRM. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 16:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:OnePageCRM has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:OnePageCRM. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Theroadislong - thank you for reviewing the draft! I've addressed your comment and am happy to make any other edits if you could let me know what sticks out. I'd be grateful for your guidance. Anastasia (Nastia) (talk) 17:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:OnePageCRM has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:OnePageCRM. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Anastasia (Nastia)! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Trouble with getting the draft approved, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: OnePageCRM (December 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Avgeekamfot were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:OnePageCRM 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Avgeekamfot (talk) 21:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]