User talk:Jheuristic
Just post msgs here or contact -
IM/Skype: jheuristic
ID: http://xri.net/=jheuristic
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Groopt.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Mdann52 (talk) 16:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! jheuristic (talk) 18:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Groopt
[edit]Hi Fox2k11 -
Thanks again for having a look at the article candidate. May I please request some specific advice on the page that you rejected?
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Groopt
Background:
This entry adheres rigorously to WP standards. I took WP advice and used other authoritative, bona fide, approved and published WP articles as a robust model and editing template. I cited a range of independent, reliable, published sources. It exceeds with confidence Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject. It is encyclopedic and verifiable.
Update 23:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC):
Some substantial edits were made. A authoritative citation from Harvard Law (Edudemic) was added.
There were some unusual remarks from Mdann52 concerning 'peacock words.' There are no peacock words. The Groopt article for creation is encyclopedic, well-cited and exceeds WP:NPOV criteria.
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Mdann52
Some more thoughtful examples of approved and published articles used as a specific, published model that exceed WP standards are below. Could you please look over these well-established, approved, confident and published WP pages?
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Xobni
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Groove_Networks
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Jive_Software
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Socialtext
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Yammer
There are hundreds and thousands of other examples for you. This entry matches them precisely. It is a standard, encyclopedic entry. It is in this reliable format, tone and specific standard.
Could you please reconsider your rejection and create this article? Thanks a lot. The Groopt article candidate certainly meets and confidently exceeds all WP standards. If you have editing advice required to meet WP standards, it is welcome and encouraged.
Specifics:
There are major WP:NPOV issues with this, therefore I am declining it again.
I am striving to meet WP standards and achieve parity with the examples I furnished and hundreds/thousands of others. If there are "major WP:NPOV issues" then it will be easy to identify just one.
Please use reviewers comments in future.
I don't know what that is. Please advise. At your service. Thanks again for your time, patience and perseverance.
Most cordially,
jheuristic (talk) 23:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
[edit]
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- 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 .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
SarahStierch (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)