Draft talk:Nucleus Software

Referencing

Comment: This is heavily referenced to the company's own website. Rankersbo (talk) 09:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Rankersbo (talk) We have updated the content and references section to increase the ratio of external references. Now we reference the company's website only for some key reports (like annual reports) or company profile details. Hope this helps.
Vishal0soni (talk) 04:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the edits for List of Indian IT companies.

Hello,

This is regarding the edits for List of Indian IT companies.

I am trying to create a new article for Nucleus Software, an Indian IT company based in Noida. Currently this page is in draft state (see Draft:Nucleus Software. For this, I was going through the wikipedia help pages for Help:Starting a new page This says that the best way to get started with a new article is to first have a red colored links for that article. For this reason, to create a red link for this article, I had made edits to the List of Indian IT companies (which you reverted back). Please let me know if there is any other better way for proceeding further with the article on Nucleus Software which I wish to create.

Regards, Vishal0soni (talk)

Vishal0soni. thanks for your post
Whilst the advice about creating a red-link is generally good, the best place to do this is on your userpage or sandbox, or else in a relevant article, Unfortunately you chose a list, and like many lists, these have inclusion criteria, which you did not meet. The List of Indian IT companies suffers from excessive spamming - very small companies, or even individuals, trying to promote their company/services in any way that they can. Please fell free to re-add Nucleus Software when the article is "live".
The fundamental requirement to show notability is significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (please note all three parameters must be met simultaneously; trivial coverage in reliable, independent, sources; or significant coverage in reliable, non-independent sources, do not establish notability, although once notability has been established, they can be used for other details). For companies, additional advice can be found at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

I am no expert on the notability of IT companies, but your draft article seems a good start. I would suggest three changes:-

You write the history in prose, not as a list
You put your best independent source at, or very near, the beginning - establish notability early. If possible avoid using the company's own website first
You follow WP:DATEFORMAT "9 January 1989", not "9th January, 1989"

Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 08:55, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arjayay (talk) : Thanks again for your suggestions. I have updated the article based on your suggestions. Although, regarding the second point (about using significant, relianble and independent references), i have some concerns. The items listed in the references section are numbered automatically, based on their sequence in which they appear in the article. Is there any way i can change the numbering in this list?

Response by Arjayay (talk)- Only by using the reference earlier in the text - maybe to support another statement - although looking at the references, I'm not sure which of the independent sources you think gives significant coverage? - Arjayay (talk) 09:10, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vishal0soni (talk) 11:20, 8 December 2014 (UTC) I have updated the article to remove the references to company's own website, by changing them with alternate sources of information. Hope it seems better now.[reply]

Arjayay (talk) I have further updated the article to remove the references to company's own website, by changing them with alternate sources of information. Now there is just one reference for Company's own website, that too is the financial report FY2014. Hope this works, and makes article qualify for acceptance. Thanks. Vishal0soni (talk) 06:09, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]