User talk:J. Norquist

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, J. Norquist. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 21:22, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject.

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:Despatch Industries 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hell in a Bucket (talk) 06:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! J. Norquist, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 06:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Samuell1616 was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:Despatch Industries 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

One life to live (talk) 14:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Despatch Industries. Thanks! Mr. Guye (talk) 22:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:Despatch Industries 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle Faddle 21:21, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that Draft:Despatch Industries was declined again. Most companies are not notable and should not have stand alone articles on Wikipedia. If you've read Illinois Tool Works you'll have seen that very few of its subsidiaries rate articles of their own. That said, there may exist enough material from the right sources to justify an article, if you're willing to dig it out.

If you have access to the main public library in Minneapolis, or any good university research library in that area, you should be able to find additional information from before the digital age. The Star Tribune, Twin Cities Business, and Finance and Commerce are solid sources. Stick to ones like them and avoid less desirable sources, like trade journals, as much as possible. I've added seven sources to a "Further reading" section of the draft. If you mine them all for material, you may be able to clear the bar of notability.

Because it was private for almost its entire independent history, and employed no more than 450 or so at a time, nearly all of the reliable sources that have written about it were published locally. Consequently there's a danger that the draft will be declined for being of only local interest. Despatch was very briefly a public company. There may be coverage from outside Minnesota during that period, but you may have to search paper records or microfilm/microfiche to find it. At one point Despatch also had a factory in California, so there might be reporting from there at that time.

You may find it useful to reflect on some of Wikipedia's best articles about manufacturing firms: Holt Manufacturing Company, Klein Bikes, Monster (company), and Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company. Notice how dominant the history section of the articles is? Slashing the history section as you did after the draft was declined probably isn't the path to approval. Primary sources must be used carefully, but they can be used. You can ask User:Timtrent for clarification, but in my opinion you weren't analyzing, synthesizing, or interpreting the sources (which is not allowed), but only relying too heavily on them for too much of the article (which also is not allowed). The best solution to that is to add more history, from sources outside the company so that the majority of the article comes from secondary sources and there aren't long blocks of paragraphs supported only by primary sources.

"Despatch Purchased" shouldn't be a section on the same level as the history section; it should be a subsection of history. Try one subsection for each of the five distinct ownership periods: Grapp, public, Chistianson, Peyton-Hays, and ITW. From what I've read, the story of the company is how it swung to serve different industries at different times: streetcar companies, bakers, the munitions industry, the early electronics industry, pharmaceutical manufacturers, high tech fabricators, solar panel manufacturers, and carbon fiber makers. Each industry could be a paragraph in whichever ownership period the company began focusing on that industry. Some coverage of different classes of oven could be worked into the text, such as when the company began producing that class.

If you slash anything, slash the current products. That bullet list is to an editor like a matador's cape to a bull. It screams advertising and promotion, which are not permitted on Wikipedia. Any products section should complement the history section.

I hope that all makes sense and you find it useful. Worldbruce (talk) 05:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your thoughtful response and helpful suggestions. I really appreciate it! Worldbruce (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Worldbruce. I showed you WP:PRIMARY that you may see where and when and how to use a primary source. The "how not to" is a by-product. Be aware that multiple links to the org's own web site also smack of promotion. Writing a good article is simple, but not easy. Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. Fiddle Faddle 07:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your help! I truly appreciate it! Fiddle Faddle(talk) 03:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

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:Despatch Industries 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 get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Aerospeed (Talk) 22:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Despatch Industries, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 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) 01:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Despatch Industries, 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) 01:30, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, J. Norquist. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Despatch Industries".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation 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}} 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. JMHamo (talk) 10:18, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]