User talk:AshleyThomas123!

This is AshleyThomas123!'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.

Welcome!

Hello, AshleyThomas123!!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: ARC Risk Group (October 29)

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

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.

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:ARC Risk Group 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AshleyThomas123!! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: ARC Risk Group (October 29)

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

Jamiebuba (talk) 12:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox2 (October 29)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by Timtrent were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Do not seek to advertise this here

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello, I'm Timtrent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:AshleyThomas123!/sandbox2

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:AshleyThomas123!/sandbox2, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: ARC Risk Group (October 29)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not one of the sources cited contributes anything towards notability per WP:NCORP.

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:ARC Risk Group 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:00, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As an employee of ARC you are advised not to create a draft

However, you may do so.

Your problem is that you are unlikely to be that one special person in 10,000 who is capable of being objective about their employer.

Start by reading this essay. It has a process in it which will succeed provided the topic is notable. No useful references? Then it is not notable. There is then no point in making the attempt

If you are being instructed to create this by a manager, tell them to read this message. Also make sure they understand that an article here does not help the business Gaun a reputation, We record all aspects of a notable business, including the bad stuff.

Can I recall what was advertorial in your deleted sandbox? Yes. All of it.

Be aware that we tolerate paid editing, welcome those who do not trouble us for undue help, and do not welcome those who are unduly demanding.

Finally, please do not use a sandbox to seek to communicate. That is what user talk pages are for. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:AshleyThomas123!/sandbox2

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:AshleyThomas123!/sandbox2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:47, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

I'm concerned that you're getting close to having your account blocked for spamming, so I'll provide this bit of advice in the hope that you can avoid that.

We have no interest in what your employer wants to say about itself, or what you want to say about them in case that's different. If you merely want to tell the world about your business, you'll have to use other channels for that; here on Wikipedia that is considered pure promotion (see WP:YESPROMO).

Instead, we want almost exclusively to know what independent and reliable secondary sources have said about your business, and what makes it worthy of note enough to be included in a global encyclopaedia (note: not a business directory). So your first task is to find a few (3-5) sources that meet the WP:GNG criteria, and summarise (in your own words, but without putting any extra 'spin' on things) what they have said. You may then supplement this with information from primary sources such as your company website, but you must keep it to a minimum, and only include factual, entirely non-contentious information such as year of founding, location of your HQ, names of senior execs, etc.

Note that acceptable sources excludes press releases, routine business reporting (financial results, M&A, appointments, new markets or locations, product launches, etc.), interviews, anything where someone from the business is commenting on other matters, any sort of churnalism, and sponsored content.

If you cannot find sufficient sources that meet the GNG standard, then your business is probably not notable enough to have its own article at this time.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your advice, I will seek to re-edit the sandbox with this in mind. I would like to ask why the sources that were selected are not considered reliable and independent secondary sources as they were for example ESMA and FCA, alongside Global ABS which are all reputable and independent for ARC? AshleyThomas123! (talk) 09:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please also have a look at WP:42. -- asilvering (talk) 23:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: ARC Risk Group (October 29)

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

DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

User:AshleyThomas123!/sandbox may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]