Sam325
 | This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies. |
Welcome Sam325!
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Do's and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the 
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own private sandbox for use any time. Perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put
{{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.Your submission at Articles for creation
edit
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FORZA.
- 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 Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alexrexpvt (talk) 13:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
edit - If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FORZA.
- 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 Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Dreams are real. TV is not. (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. There are actually a couple of different issues that contributed to the decision that it was too promotional:
- The final section sounds like an advertising brochure. As well as operating a modern GMP manufacturing facility, FORZA is certified ISO 22000, ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 in recognition of its compliance with international quality, safety and environmental standards. The company is also a member of Leatherhead Food Research and holds 15 trademarks with the Intellectual Property Office. We really need to make sure that article sections describe their subjects neutrally; this doesn't mean that you need to mention problems where none exists, but it does mean that we have to watch our adjectives and the way that we present positive points; in this specific situation, it would have been good to mention the ISO certifications with links (which you provided) and nothing more.
- Much of the rest of the article was uncited and talked about the company's achievements in this way or that (e.g. the portion on T5 pills emphasised how Forza "completely transformed the food supplement industry"); when sources aren't provided for such strongly positive statements, it makes us wonder about the extent to which we can trust those statements.
Please note that I deleted it after someone else had already reviewed it and declined your submission as advertising. Pages can be undeleted by administrators upon users' requests, so that the users can improve them; we generally don't do this with things deleted as advertising, but I would be happy to email you the contents of the page if you wish. Nyttend (talk) 12:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- Email sent. Two reminders: (1) You left a note at my talk page while logged out, which causes your IP address to be displayed. This can be used to identify you, which doesn't matter if you don't care, but it's a big deal if you don't want to be identified. Do you want it to be removed? I can do it easily, or I can leave it alone if you don't care. Either way, it's a good idea to make sure that you're logged in when editing, if for no other reason than that your edits will all be together at your contribution page that way. (2) Forgot to mention that we normally don't have article titles in all caps. This is done for entities whose names are acronyms, e.g. NATO or NASA, but entities that simply style their names in all caps have articles with normal sentence case, e.g. Lego or Time (magazine). Not a big deal; if you resubmit it with all caps and it's accepted, the reviewer will probably end up moving it. Nyttend (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- Check the history of my talk page; you'll see that I changed the link in the signature, and the IP address is no longer visible. And no need to apologise; the caps thing is a thoroughly minor issue that's easily fixed. Nyttend (talk) 13:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- Go ahead; I'll be happy to try to help. Nyttend (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- I'll need to be in my car before long, but I can offer a couple of preliminary comments: (1) The tone sounds better. Nothing in particular, but the whole thing seems more neutral and less promotional. (2) You still need to improve the sourcing substantially. Putting a citation after a piece of text says "All this text comes from that source", and while I've not yet checked most of the sources, the middle part of "The UK's first legal T5" is concerning — your source doesn't mention Forza or the T5. Remember, however, that it's at AFC specifically so that you can improve it gradually instead of needing to have it all at once. I'll try to get you a better review later today. Nyttend (talk) 13:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
- Got your note as I was preparing for work, and I'm on just a short break right now, so I can't yet help you. I'll try to do it this evening (overnight UK time), so if I've not done it when you check in tomorrow, please leave me a reminder note. Nyttend (talk) 18:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
- Ugg, sorry — I had plenty of time last night and completely forgot. Your tone is quite neutral; I don't think there are any problems with it, and I doubt that others will object. If the T5 were a big deal for the company, it should definitely be mentioned, and the way you're writing about it now is quite appropriate. There's just one thing I'd advise you changing: unless I overlooked something, the current version of the draft has just one source that discusses Forza directly (citation #4), while the rest are talking about side issues. It's fine to have sources for side issues that are relevant, and all of your side issues look relevant, but you need to change the citations somewhat, because right now the side-issue sources are being used to cite statements about Forza — for example, #3 doesn't mention the T5, but the current version of the draft makes it look as if the source talks about the T5 being replaced. This, together with the lack of sources for the section on the technology centre, means that the page isn't ready yet for being an article; however, this is precisely why we have places like Articles for Creation, since it's important that you be able to draft something gradually instead of needing to write everything all at once. Nyttend (talk) 17:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
- You're welcome, and I'll be happy to help when you ask for it. Nyttend (talk) 12:55, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- Ugg, sorry — I had plenty of time last night and completely forgot. Your tone is quite neutral; I don't think there are any problems with it, and I doubt that others will object. If the T5 were a big deal for the company, it should definitely be mentioned, and the way you're writing about it now is quite appropriate. There's just one thing I'd advise you changing: unless I overlooked something, the current version of the draft has just one source that discusses Forza directly (citation #4), while the rest are talking about side issues. It's fine to have sources for side issues that are relevant, and all of your side issues look relevant, but you need to change the citations somewhat, because right now the side-issue sources are being used to cite statements about Forza — for example, #3 doesn't mention the T5, but the current version of the draft makes it look as if the source talks about the T5 being replaced. This, together with the lack of sources for the section on the technology centre, means that the page isn't ready yet for being an article; however, this is precisely why we have places like Articles for Creation, since it's important that you be able to draft something gradually instead of needing to write everything all at once. Nyttend (talk) 17:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
- Got your note as I was preparing for work, and I'm on just a short break right now, so I can't yet help you. I'll try to do it this evening (overnight UK time), so if I've not done it when you check in tomorrow, please leave me a reminder note. Nyttend (talk) 18:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
- I'll need to be in my car before long, but I can offer a couple of preliminary comments: (1) The tone sounds better. Nothing in particular, but the whole thing seems more neutral and less promotional. (2) You still need to improve the sourcing substantially. Putting a citation after a piece of text says "All this text comes from that source", and while I've not yet checked most of the sources, the middle part of "The UK's first legal T5" is concerning — your source doesn't mention Forza or the T5. Remember, however, that it's at AFC specifically so that you can improve it gradually instead of needing to have it all at once. I'll try to get you a better review later today. Nyttend (talk) 13:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
- Go ahead; I'll be happy to try to help. Nyttend (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- Check the history of my talk page; you'll see that I changed the link in the signature, and the IP address is no longer visible. And no need to apologise; the caps thing is a thoroughly minor issue that's easily fixed. Nyttend (talk) 13:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Forza, 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) 02:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Forza
edit
Hello Sam325. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Forza".
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Forza}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)