Jump to content

Talk:LifeArc

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AFC review

[edit]

AFC submission|d|corp|declinets=20130519184820|decliner=SarahStierch|ts=20130515110232|u=Mcdi7sh2|ns=5

  • Comment: Hi there. Thanks for wanting to improve Wikipedia. It seems you're still struggling with this article. Here is why we have issues with your citations:
    #[1] This is from the subjects website. That makes it a non-reliable source.
    #[2] this interview with the CEO is super promotional in nature and I would not consider it reliable or able to help establish notability.
    #[3] shows that MRCT works with the UK gov, but, this doesn't establish notability because it is created by an org associated with MRCT (the government).
    #[4] this citation doesn't even mention the organization.
    #[5] press releases are not reliable sources.
    #[6] another un-reliable source because it was published by an org/company that MRCT is involved with.
    Please replace all of these citations with reliable sources. If you can't, then that means MRCT does not merit it's own Wikipedia article yet. Thanks, and I encourage you to help improve one of the 4 million other articles we have on wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 18:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sarah, the subject is very clearly notable, it is just a matter of finding the sources that say so. Excluding all UK government sources because the organization works with the govt is somewhat unreasonable - I can't imagine a US body being treated the same way. Failing a quick resolution the material should perhaps be added to the main MRC article. Ref 3 should certainly be allowable. Press releases, especially from quoted companies, are "reliable" for basic factual statements about the organizations making them - where do you think newspapers get their information from? Johnbod (talk) 20:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]