But there are other articles like mine! edit
As far as any other article is concerned: (a) this isn't a competition; (b) there isn't a system where a single person reviews every new article with a single perspective and a single set of criteria (c) I haven't looked, but there may well be differences between your article and the one(s) you cited that make all the difference in whether they meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (d) if the other article really does meet criteria for deletion, then the conclusion is that it may be deleted, not that yours should be kept.
I want to let everyone know about this great new thing! edit
Wikipedia isn't a platform for announcing that which is new, for publicizing, promoting, advocating, or popularizing anything. It's an encyclopedia for verifiable information on topics whose notability is already attested through references to reliable third-party sources.
Loop (concept) edit
- I'm sorry, but none of what you wrote after the word "promotional", even if all true, negates the promotional nature of the presentation. Critical information can be delivered in a promotional manner. Even your explanation of why the article isn't promotional ("It is raising awareness" [this isn't Wikipedia's goal—see the essay Wikipedia:Raising awareness] and your last sentence, "It is of great significance ...") is couched in promotional language. Wikipedia articles aren't statements by their topics, a forum through which people or organizations can present themselves like Facebook or LinkedIn. (I realize you may not be associated with Loop, but the article does read as though it were placed there at the behest of the organization.) They're encyclopedia articles, reference articles, written from a neutral point of view, without enthusiasm over their topics and not expressed from their topics' point of view. Largoplazo (talk) 13:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)