User talk:Scottholdensmith

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Second Story Interactive Studios.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Help desk or the reviewer's talk page. Alternatively, you can ask for help via live help

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 21:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Second Story Interactive Studios.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk or via live help

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! B music ian 02:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Second Story Interactive Studios, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-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 are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

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!

ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Secondstory building2.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Secondstory building2.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:16, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About COI

Hello Scottholdensmith. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Second Story Interactive Studios, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Valfontis (talk) 17:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "tags" added to the article, here is a brief synopsis of the issues:

Notability - see WP:CORP as to how to assert notability. The NY Times article is a great example of a reliable source that is independent of the subject and really is covering the company. The other articles give some coverage, but it is less than exclusive. Try the Portland Business Journal and The Oregonian, which might have some local coverage to better assert notability.
Advertisement - the first section includes the heading "capabilities". The only other section is "awards and recognition". Those things raise red flags as to promotion. The only time capabilities tend to matter is if someone is looking to hire the company. I would suggest "services" or the like instead. Then perhaps integrate the "awards and recognition" into a history section.
Citations - see WP:REF on how to format the references. Bare URLs are frowned upon.

I hope that answers all the questions. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just drop me a note on my talk page once you are done and I can take a look and remove the tags. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:47, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Better, so I removed the tags. I would suggest reviewing the changes I made to see some formatting items. Also, to further improve the article, review the manual of style. And, I would suggest removing the mentions that the company was featured in newspaper articles, and instead incorporate the information from those newspapers into this article. For instance, from The Oregonian article, incorporate when they moved to Portland, the names of the founders, and some of the examples of their projects. That is how notability is demonstrated. Otherwise it is like the kid in school who tells everyone he is cool, which means he's not. Show me you're cool, don't tell me. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:30, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]