User talk:Igor-23

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Igor-23, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Doctor^G (talk) 18:47, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seekon Directory (September 26)

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

Whispe ring 01:20, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. SwisterTwister talk 14:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Seekon logo.gif

Thanks for uploading File:Seekon logo.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 18:46, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Really bad form

It's bad form to move a declined article from draft space to main space without resubmitting it for review, particularly if you have a conflict of interest, which seems to be the case. Please review WP:PAID and disclose your paid editing status, as you legally obligated yourself to do as a condition of creating your account. I have moved the article back to draft space, as it is still unacceptable because it fails to comply with WP:CORP criteria for inclusion. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:08, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request re Seekon Directory page rejection

This submission Draft:Seekon Directory was rejected by Whispering as promotional: “reads like advertisement.” It was then (current draft) substantially rewritten to remove any wording that might be considered promotional, better conform to the other pages in Category: Web directories and resubmitted as a draft. There was no subsequent objection for two weeks so it was moved to Seekon Directory as per the move instructions but has now been moved back to the Draft space and new additional objections raised. Help is requested in understanding the current objections. Sorry if this is not the proper procedure for a resubmission.

Objectors are requested to please explain how the subject page now “reads more like an advertisement” than the other existing pages in this category. I agree with the idea that Wikipedia should not contain promotional material. However, obviously, it must contain descriptive material that describes the differences between different items in a category. Specific information on this would be very helpful in fixing the submission.

I am not being paid for working on this item or any of my other Wikipedia activities.

This submission otherwise appears to conform closely to other previously accepted pages in the Category:Web directories, which contains 36 other pages describing other web directories. Objectors are requested to explain how this page is less acceptable than many of the existing Wikipedia pages in this category. In particular, look at the following:

Some of these pages are flagged for supposedly not meeting some Wikipedia requirement but are still accepted and displayed. Some are flagged for “multiple issues” but are still accepted and displayed. Any aid in understanding why each of these pages has been accepted but the subject page has been removed would be greatly appreciated and aid in correcting the subject page and avoiding such difficulties in the future.

Igor-23 (talk) 16:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

What you should have done is re-submit it for review after addressing the concerns. You didn't do that. While the article is no longer promotional, it also doesn't demonstrate that it meets WP:CORP criteria for inclusion. You can try submitting it for review again, but it will likely be rejected again due to the quality of the sources, none of which demonstrate significant coverage by independent reliable sources. They are primarily sources written by or in behalf of the subject, directory listings, and one white-paper essay.

It is irrelevant what other junk might exist on Wikipedia. Each article stands or falls on its own merits. The fact that there are other poor articles in main space isn't a valid reason to include one more.

I could have deleted this article in accordance with WP:A7 but after looking at its history, I decided to restore it back to draft space instead to give you an opportunity to improve it. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK Anachronist I will resubmit the page for review. However, I am stunned by your admitted complete lack of impartiality. If you really believe what you say shouldn’t you be spending your time deleting all those “poor” “junk” articles that have been accepted by Wikipedia and therefore (according to you) making Wikipedia better.

It is true that any one item in this category might be seen as not completely meeting the notability criteria for having its own page but this category is organized in such a way as to require separate pages for each item as opposed to more minor mentions. (See the entries on Web directories.) Even a minimal attempt at fairness would appear to require accepting new articles that meet the requirements imposed on the old articles or deleting the old articles. Igor-23 (talk) 14:29, 23 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

There are several millions of articles here, just a few thousand active editors, and not all of the new submissions can be monitored. Fairness and impartiality requires that all articles meet some minimum standards, which have been agreed upon by community consensus. Fairness emphatically doesn't require that we accept articles not meeting those standards just because some other poor articles slipped by. Those poor articles are deleted every day; just have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.

Impartiality would have meant deleting your article outright because it obviously failed to meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Instead, I moved it to draft space to give you a chance to improve it. So yes, I may be guilty of a lack of impartiality, but in favor of improving the article rather than removing it.

On my part, I am stunned that you have written a company article while completely failing to read or understand WP:CORP, which describe criteria for inclusion for companies. Not a single one of the references provided qualifies as significant coverage by reliable sources that are independent of the company. Not a single one. The only citation that offers any significant coverage was written by someone from Azinet, which runs Seekon — hardly an independent source. Until the article shows multiple qualifying sources, it cannot be accepted.

If it helps, try reading Wikipedia:Golden rule to get a brief overview of what is expected from articles about companies. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:30, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you admit that you are using criteria against this item that are obviously and grossly not being applied to the other articles in the category. “Those poor articles are deleted every day” does not appear to apply to the articles in this category, which as stated earlier, has characteristics that affect this issue. Igor-23 (talk) 14:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you are incorrect. Some of those articles you listed will be deleted shortly. You have been given advice on how to proceed with your article, which to be honest, has been spared a deletion by me moving it to draft space. Believe me it would not have survived long in main space, in its current state with zero evidence of meeting WP:CORP criteria for inclusion. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:43, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Seekon Directory (November 22)

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 (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), 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:

Only an advertised business profile with the accompanying information and sources based on announcements and notices, so we cannot accept them as this would make the article sound like public relations.

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:Seekon Directory 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 15:22, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Seekon Directory concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Seekon Directory, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Seekon Directory

Hello, Igor-23. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Seekon Directory".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 02:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]