User talk:Wikipedialuva/Archives/2023/March

Rollback granted

Hi Wikipedialuva. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please keep the following things in mind while using rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle or RedWarn.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of United Biomedical Asia

Hello Wikipedialuva,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged United Biomedical Asia for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

M.Ashraf333 (talk) 13:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Replied at User_talk:Jimfbleak. Wikipedialuva (talk) 21:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for declaring that you have no conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, please read the guidance below, and also note that the different language wikipedias are completely independent, what is acceptable on Chinese wikipedia may not be here

• you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

• Your references are either primary journal sources written by people associated with the company or funded by it, or are just reporting what the company has said, not independent third party sources. In the case of the vaccines, primary sources are not suitable to show notability of the vaccine, let alone the company

• The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

1. significant coverage in
2. independent,
3. multiple,
4. reliable,
5. secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

What a company makes is not a criterion for notability. You tell us what it sells, but the company appears to have no employees, turnover or profits, and even its headquarters are not mentioned in the actual text, and your references, even if they were suitable, tell us nothing about the company, as opposed to its products.

• You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

• I take the view that an article that only tells us what a company sells is by definition promotional, especially without proper third-party sources. Even the claim licensed for use in mainland China and Taiwan is sourced in the Archives of Virology article to www.unitedbiomedical.com, rather than the licencing authority

• There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
• You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Not a reason for deletion, but headings should be in sentence case.

It may not have been your intention, but you have presented us with a basically self sourced article, exclusively about what it sells. Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the company meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: Thank you for the very detailed and specific response and also for letting me know how to improve my article writing. I did not save a copy of the article, so I cannot respond to specifics without having the article in front of me. I would like to be able to respond and also continue working on the article in draft form. Would you mind WP:REFUNDing it to draft space? Thanks! Wikipedialuva (talk) 23:43, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Restored at User:Wikipedialuva/United Biomedical Asia Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:52, 22 March 2023 (UTC)