User talk:Bcndz5

Welcome

Hello, Bcndz5, and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are a course instructor leading a class project.

New to Wikipedia or want to learn about best practices for Wikipedia assignments?

Go through our online training for educators

The training includes instructions for setting up a structured course page, with tools for tracking student work and encouraging peer review. Please also see this helpful advice for instructors.

If you run into problems or want some feedback on your Wikipedia assignment plans, try posting to the education noticeboard.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay after your assignment is finished! Blue Riband► 14:47, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Indetex's implementation of the European Green Deal

It seems to me that your student either hasn't been given, or has ignored, guidance on editing Wikipedia. I don't know if you saw the text prior to deletion

When writing about an organisation.

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

The text was almost entirely unsourced apart from three references to its own sites.

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:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

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

Its basically "this is what we do". Little about the organisation itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, management structure, turnover or profits.

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

Company talk throughout a prominent global fashion retailer... has actively engaged in aligning its operations with the objectives outlined... This significant initiative... aims to transition the region to a more sustainable and environmentally friendly economy... one of the world's largest fashion retailer... ambitious sustainability targets and initiatives aimed at reducing its environmental footprint and promoting a more sustainable fashion industry... and so on ad nausam.

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.

I didn't check, but the total absence of wikilinks and independent refs, the highly promotional tone, and the company talk throughout all raise suspicions.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article.

Obviously, I can restore the text, but I wonder what the point is, better to start from scratch. The experienced editor who nominated it for speedy deletion and I both thought it was beyond any easy remedy. Let me know what you think can be achieved by restoring this as a draft. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, if the editor hadn't declared as a student, I would have indefinitely blocked the account as a spam-only account or undisclosed paid editor Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak I think restoring the draft, together with your comments above about why the article is not appropriate for Wikipedia, would provide a really excellent learning experience for the students in this group and for my future students who I would be able to offer this whole thing as a case study. As I said previously, I absolutely agree with you about removing the article from mainspace. But as things stand, from the point of view of the students, someone simply deleted their work and provided no feedback. They're not Wikipedia experts, and neither am I, that's the point. This has the potential to be a very discouraging experience for them, or, a very valuable one. Bcndz5 (talk) 07:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, restored to User:Bcndz5/Indetex's implementation of the European Green Deal, and you have my comments above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak Thanks, appreciated. Bcndz5 (talk) 07:00, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]