This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article was accepted on 27 May 2013 by reviewer Johnbod (talk·contribs).
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]
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)