User talk:McMi!!ian

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! AlphonseOop (talk) 03:49, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 04:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this feedback. I am struggling with "notability" on Wikipedia, as pieces of information which are notable to myself, as a rural resident of Ontario, may only be relevant/notable to other rural residents of Ontario. I urge Wikipedia editors to not discriminate against these articles based on this.

I have provided more details in my articles for two rural ISPs than the article which has been accepted for Dery Telecom (Dery Telecom), which is already on that list of Canadian ISPs: List of internet service providers in Canada. The only substantive difference seems to be that Dery Telecom is owned by Cogeco.

So just to confirm: I am being made to create individual Wikipedia pages for these rural ISPs so that they can be linked to from that list of Canadian ISPs, but then the individual pages I am creating are being rejected due to "notability" and "advertising" problems. So I must ask, what is the relationship between Wikipedia and Cogeco, Rogers, Bell and Shaw? McMi!!ian (talk) 05:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please take this in the constructive spirit in which it is offered: you need to familiarise yourself better with the concept of notability, as it is construed in the Wikipedia context, before you get into trouble here. There is no such thing as a subject being "notable to [your]self"; things either are notable, in a more or less absolute sense, or they are not. In the case of companies, this is purely a question of whether independent and reliable secondary sources have, of their own volition, published significant coverage of the subject. If they have, then the subject is likely notable. If they haven't, then it almost certainly is not, regardless of how 'important' or 'well-known' or 'highly-regarded' or large or old or valuable, etc. it may be.

As for your comment about other articles that may be out there, it is certainly true that among the c. 6.7m articles in the English-language Wikipedia there are many that do not meet our current standards, such as the Dery Telecom one you mention. They may have been published by editors who have the necessary permissions to create articles directly without going through a review process. Some of them may be so old that they pre-date the review system altogether: case in point, the Dery Telecom article is 17 years old. If you find articles that are lacking in some respect, you are more than welcome to improve them, or where this isn't possible, to initiate deletion proceedings. Regardless, the existence of such articles is not a reason to create more such problems. (You may also wish to read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which elaborates on this point.)

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Storm Internet Services (January 7)

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 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:Storm Internet Services 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) 08:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, McMi!!ian! 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) 08:53, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (January 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Star Mississippi 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 User:McMi!!ian/sandbox 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.

Star Mississippi 02:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:McMi!!ian/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:McMi!!ian/sandbox. Thanks! Star Mississippi 02:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Storm Internet Services, from its old location at User:McMi!!ian/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 20:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Storm Internet Services (January 28)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company, focusing on what the company says about itself. Corporate notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject.

Not every business corporation is notable, and this draft does not establish corporate notability. You may ask for advice about corporate notability at the Teahouse.

This draft reads like an advertisement, but Wikipedia is not for advertising.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: WTC Communications (February 1)

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:

No evidence of notability.

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:WTC Communications 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) 07:43, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:WTC Communications

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 Draft:WTC Communications, 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 be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.seeclearfield.com/resources/case-studies/case-study-wtc-communications.html. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. You've been warned about creating articles about companies without any indication of notability. Please stop. Wikipedia is not meant to be a list of all companies that exist. Star Mississippi 13:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Storm Internet Services

Hello, McMi!!ian. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Storm Internet Services, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Storm Internet Services

Hello, McMi!!ian. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Storm Internet Services".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]