User talk:Trend71

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. I deleted your article because

it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: ...exclusive benchmark for independent premium ladies wear... iconic shop window mannequins... unique identity... elegant showroom... dresses...—and so on, spam, spam, spam.
it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Although the lack of references doesn't matter in a draft, I can't see any facts supporting notability, such as number of employees, turnover or profits.
The article was a close paraphrase of this. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. But in any case the copyrighted text is far too promotional to be useful for Wikipedia's purposes, so there would not be any point in your jumping through all the hoops that are required.
If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jim for your feedback! I have to say I did lots of research before I submitted the article and I looked up pretty much every design house so I am a little surprised that the tone sounds promotional. I will however work those passages over. I had also provided two references. Why they did not show is not quite clear to me. I added them as it was described in the howto section. Furthermore I would like to outline that this is not my organization. I don't even work there. It is a boutique/ designhouse that is existing 50 years in London. I think this is notable enough for an entry in Wikipedia. I will work on it again and come back to you. Brgds, Trend71Trend71 (talk) 09:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, note that I won't necessarily see any messages here unless you start the message with a link to my user name User:Jimfbleak and make sure you sign your message at the time you post it. That will notify me that you have posted here. The establishment may or may not be notable enough. As I said above, it needs independent verifiable sources, to be written neutrally in your own words, and explain why it is notable by our criteria. I don't know what happened to your refs, but they were not in text in any form Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]