User talk:ConnorJClements

This is ConnorJClements's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health (September 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MarkTraceur was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orion Health and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MarkTraceur (talk) 19:30, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! ConnorJClements, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! MarkTraceur (talk) 19:30, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health (September 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Abdullah Alam was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orion Health and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Abdullah Alam (talk) 03:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health (November 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chenzw was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orion Health and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chenzw Talk 15:38, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health (November 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nikolaiho was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

You should look at other articles about companies on Wikipedia and try to follow their style of formatting. The way this article is written causes it to be seen as self promoting, like an advertisement.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orion Health and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

NikolaiHo^☎️ 05:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health (December 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by NotTheFakeJTP was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orion Health and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:29, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health (January 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Still nothing for satisfying our notability policies as the links are too trivial because they're only company announcements and mentions; the information itself is not convincing and isn't what our policies consider significant.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orion Health and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 04:36, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Orion Health has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Orion Health. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 03:14, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with: Getting page 'Orion Health' live.

Hi,

Orion Health used to have a wikipedia page in 2006, but it was deleted a few years later when a salesperson from the company made changes that caused it to "read more like an advertisment than an encyclopedia entry".

A few people from the Organisation tried to re-post the page (with changes) in 2014 but the page was immediately deleted due to the issues the previous changes had caused.

This is the third time the pages have been tried to be re-added. And I was wondering what needs to be done to ensure that the pages can be created this time. My previous attempts at creating a non-biased encyclopedic entry have also been deleted, one for 'advertising complaints' and one for 'lack of notability'. I was also told to "Comment: You should look at other articles about companies on Wikipedia and try to follow their style of formatting. The way this article is written causes it to be seen as self promoting, like an advertisement. NikolaiHo☎️ 05:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)" - So I used companies pages such as Cerner, Allscripts and Google Health as comparisons and removed all advertising and self-promotion on the page.

See my work here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ConnorJClements/sandbox

Can you please recommend any other changes that I could make to get this page live?

ConnorJClements (talk) 02:44, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Response - Changes still required

I'm not sure whether to comment here or at your account, but I'll begin my statements here. All sources offered are only published or republished company announcements, such as TechCrunch which we've now considered an unacceptable source since it will boldly label "This is based from a company press release" or merely cite their own company website as a source; next, all other sources, regardless of publication, mirror this and there's a noticeable consistency in which it suggests it was all influenced. Because there's been enough time and not what we would need for a convincing article, it's been nominated for deletion because our policies themselves support anything that has no convincing chances of satisfying at least our basic policies. Next, the information overall is too close at what they would advertise at their own company webpages or affiliated ones. As our policies state, there's no automatic inherited notability from anything or anyone, and Draft:Orion Health shows the past concerns, which ultimately lead to the article's locking. For articles to be at least marginally accepted, we need enough chances it would not be challenged for deletion, especially if the acceptance was questionable to begin with. Apparently, an article for Orion Health was also deleted in 2006 at Orion Health. Now, while a company valued at $1 billion would be significant, we would need significant major independent news in major publications (and not simply PR trade publishers) to outweigh any concerns of PR. In this case, I must ask you see our policies, WP:What Wikipedia is not and WP:PAID. SwisterTwister talk 05:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Thanks for the response - I have now moved the question and your response to my talk page to make things more clear.

Do sources such as 'nzherald' and 'stuff.co.nz' not count as reliable independent news sources?

ConnorJClements (talk) 01:18, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Response

They can but it can vary in the contents, such as they must be significant independent news and not something like business announcements, PR or similar. SwisterTwister talk 03:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Thanks again for the response.

I have previously made the disclosure that I am an employee of the company on my user page.

I have done my utmost to comply with Wikipedia's policies and have read through what it is and isn't.

I mentioned these sites (nzherald, stuff) as it seems that after looking at other pages to get an idea of how to go about correctly publishing my page (as recommended), I can see that there are many references on published pages that come from these sources, and I included similar articles specifically. However, you say these are business announcements, PR or similar. Has Wikipedia toughened its stance on articles that can be referenced recently? (i.e. Tech Crunch is now no good, yet articles remain as citations on other published pages). I have made further changes to the sandbox article, a simple entry is all that is required and no bias or advertising was ever intended - I just feel the company is notable and deserves reinstatement.

Apologies for the back-and-forth.

Although you have openly stated you are a company employee, there's still the concern of advertising that has persisted in each version including shown at previous Drafts; each version has been unconvincing in our non-negotiable policy WP:What Wikipedia is not because it still heavily focuses with what the company itself advertises, something that is quite challenging to counter or at least tone down, when a company person is involved. As such, the Draft is still unacceptable including by our simplest set standard WP:CORPDEPTH. SwisterTwister talk 02:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

I've made further changes to remove any content that may have been advertising. I once again will state that it isn't my intention to advertise, but understand that as an employee it could be difficult to avoid the implication.

ConnorJClements (talk) 03:03, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Orion Health has been accepted

Orion Health, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Schwede 66 09:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]