Help desk
< October 26	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 28 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

October 27

00:32:38, 27 October 2015 review of submission by Kaseypoet

Kaseypoet (talk · contribs)

Hello, I was told that "Most of the references for this article are its own and those of its founders.  Please provide evidence of notability in the form of independently published material in reliable secondary sources." Only 3 out of my 9 sources are its own or its founders. I can remove those sources if need be, but there are 6 reputable media sources independent of the company in my citations. Is there something I'm missing? Thanks!

Kaseypoet (talk) 00:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on whether the reviewer is correct, something I have not checked, but that you know. You may wish to talk to them over this. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. Fiddle Faddle 22:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaseypoet: I've formatted the references to make the sources clearer. You could carry this further by adding dates of publication. Wikipedia is looking for articles about companies that have made an enduring mark on the historical record. Ongoing coverage over a period of years can be an indicator of that, compared with a brief spike of coverage around one event.

You're best off first asking the reviewer for clarification of their comments. If I were reviewing it I would be concerned about two things. (1) The draft depends heavily on interviews with Tom. Wikipedia articles need to represent the full range of views on a subject. Interviews can be useful sources, but to count towards notability they need to include a healthy amount of arms length analysis and perspective. If they're just Tom talking about Tom (or Tom's company), then they're just the company line, are primary sources, and aren't really independent, no matter who publishes them. (2) To fulfil the notability criteria for companies, coverage specifically of the company is needed. Coverage judged to be of the founder or of a product may not count. The IFC article, for example, might help establish the notability of Tom or of Love, but doesn't even mention To the Stars by name, so a reviewer might discount that source.

If the company is still closely associated with Tom, you might be better off creating a redirect to the article about him and developing the topic there, where currently it isn't even mentioned. If at a later date its notability independent of him is clear, and the amount of information about the company justifies it, it could be spun off into its own article. Worldbruce (talk) 00:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21:22:21, 27 October 2015 review of submission by Stewpie607

Stewpie607 (talk · contribs)

Hi,

Following a couple of rejections I am a little unsure on how I could improve the referencing in my draft article. Could you give me some examples of appropriate references or a slightly more concise detail on what type of reference is appropriate - I have read the referencing article several times but end up with the thought that it is extremely hard to reference outside of an associations literature when discussing one!

Thanks.

Stewpie607 (talk) 21:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem you face is that the organisation may be interesting, useful, but may not pass WP:CORP.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL may be useful, or some modification to that search. Fiddle Faddle 21:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Stewpie607: There's an entire project, Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains, dedicated to all things RR, including railroad engineering and technology. If you ask at the project's talk page, someone there may be able to suggest alternative sources for the topic. Worldbruce (talk) 00:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]