User talk:Sanjay2023

Hi Sanjay2023

Here is a sources assessment for your draft about Pelatro, based on the criteria linked at WP:42 and WP:Notability.

1. 0/10 - Passing mention -- "London Stock Exchange | London Stock Exchange". www.londonstockexchange.com. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
2. 0/10, interviews do not qualify -- "INTERVIEW: Pelatro $7.0m Acquisition of Danateq - DirectorsTalk". 2018-08-01. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
3. 0/10, not independent as it is a press release by pelatro -- "Pelatro Plc signs Global Framework Agreement with Telenor Group for Loyalty Management Solution - DirectorsTalk". 2018-10-02. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
4. 0/10, not independent as it is a press release by pelatro -- "Pelatro to provide loyalty management software to Grameenphone". polaris.brighterir.com. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
5. 1/10, not in depth coverage, only passing mention -- "Pelatro Plc Selected by NCell to provide Campaign Management Solution - DirectorsTalk". 2018-12-04. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
6. 0/10, not independent as it is a press release by pelatro -- "Pelatro's mViva platform chosen by a small southern European telco for campaign management operations". polaris.brighterir.com. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
7. 0/10, not independent as it is a press release by pelatro -- "African telco to implement mViva Campaign Management Solution on a managed services basis". polaris.brighterir.com. Retrieved 2022-12-02.
8. 7/10, a substantial award and analysis; what's missing is independence, as this source is published by the organization issuing the award; it may be a good idea to find independent news articles about this award; this is why this source is not a ten out of ten -- Chan, Tammy (2022-04-07). "Pelatro Applauded by Frost & Sullivan for Enabling Customer Value and Loyalty Management with Its Customer Engagement Hub". Frost & Sullivan. Retrieved 2022-12-02.

Generally, for an article about a company to pass notability evaluation and be approved, the following are required:

From Wikipedia:Notability:

A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

• "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is not, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
• "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
  • The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.
  • Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton, that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.
• "Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
• "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.
• "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.

If a topic does not meet these criteria but still has some verifiable facts, it might be useful to discuss it within another article.

What you need to do: Please remove the draft from the review queue, and search for additional sources that satisfy the above criteria. You will need about 5 high quality sources for the article draft to be approved.

What is the best place to request assistance:

• at Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies -> click Talk -> click Add section
• live chat at IRC, where you have inquired earlier today.

What happens next: If you don't remove the draft from the review queue, it may be declined, and you will be able to continue working on it based on mine and the reviewer's recommendations.

Please let me know if you have any questions. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 07:41, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: added clarification for source 8. --Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 08:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User:Sanjay2023/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Sanjay2023/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:58, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sanjay2023! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:58, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. Will make the necessary changes and re-submit. How can I move it back to draft space? Sanjay2023 (talk) 08:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sanjay2023. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

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.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Subash Menon and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subash Menon, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

- FitIndia ^{Talk (Admin on Commons)} 16:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]