Aayush2003

Hello, Aayush2003, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as OneDirect, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Mean as custard (talk) 12:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of OneDirect

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on OneDirect, 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, product, group, service or person 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 removed 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. Mean as custard (talk) 12:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of OneDirect

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on OneDirect, 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, product, group, service or person 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 removed 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. | Naypta^✉ opened his mouth at 06:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

HI Aayush2003. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date are about OneDirect or its deletion, which makes it seem likely that you have some relationship with that company. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, Aayush2003. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
• instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by our WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with OneDirect? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Please reply here - I am watching this page. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 10:37, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for your reply, I was unaware of the same and thank you for pointing the same out to me. Will keep this in mind the next time I edit/create a page.Aayush2003 (talk) 17:50, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. While I appreciate that you have attempted to improve the article, it still has numerous problems. I deleted your article because

• it did not provide adequate 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 company, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. Too many of your references were to your company's pages, which should only be used for the most uncontentious facts, or to quotes by your bosses
• it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

• Our understanding of customers journey
• A couple of several unsourced claims presented as fact include: knowledge of industry benchmarks and first principles approach helps us in giving you the best solution... Analytics and data science as a service to develop, scale and refine your big data strategy
• Throughout, you present opinions as incontrovertible facts, eg management tool that helps brands, including Snapdeal, Micromax and Makemytrip— You can only say that if each of the companies has verifiably said that is the case.

• it's all about what the company sells, little about the company itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
• even though I was quoting an article on the web— I had already noticed that some of the text was copied from web pages, eg the section starting OneDirect sorts out online mentions... 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, which is very rarely the case. 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 note that you have edited no other articles except this, and refer to "our" and ""us" in the text. You have a conflict of interest, as identified by Jytdog above, when editing this article, and you must declare it. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
• The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting this topic as an employee of the company or otherwise working on its behalf. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization, directly or indirectly, to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not.

  Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

  Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the company you are writing about, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Aayush2003. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Aayush2003|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please provide the required disclosure. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:39, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for your detailed reply. I was unaware of this when I started creating the page and thank you and Jytdog for pointing out the same. But I had a few questions/doubts, with respect to notability and promotional content. I wish to understand when is a company noteworthy to get a page on Wikipedia. I read the notability guidelines but got lost in the middle, it seemed a little vague "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list". Significant coverage is not clear, there are many (probably over 50) publications who have mentioned about the company in one way or another, why is that not considered significant. Reliable there are many news sites and even Economic Times and Business Standard who have run stories on the company, both of which are very reputable in India, why are they not considered reliable.

I understand that many references were from company's websites and hence not independent and probably should have cited news website there, but I was using the Domo wiki page as reference and saw that having references to the companies' site (2 times) so I felt it should be fine. Also, majority of references for the company were about the company raising multiple rounds of funding (8 out of a total of 22 references), which is the same thing I followed. Also, most other pieces of references are about their founder and his other ventures and the company being listed in the best places to work, similar articles exist for OneDirect as well. I apologize that I am again and again using Domo in my questions, but it is because I used it as a reference page. Domo also being a computer software company seemed like the best example to me.

Thanks about the tip to not quote copyrighted material even if it is publicly available, I didn't know that and probably missed that while reading the guidelines for creation of pages. Also, I had a question, which I also asked to one of the people who recommended the page be deleted, about the content being promotional, what if I remove the companies' offerings since that again would probably come under the copyrighted material section and reduce the Overview to simply 1 para or 4-6 lines. The rest of the article only talks about the funding, the customers the founder all of which is readily available via many different sources on the internet. Does the article become neutral then? Again, I ask since this was my first attempt to make a page so am a novice here. Thanks for your help and for taking the time out to help me understand what all I was doing wrong. I look forward to your reply. Aayush2003 (talk) 18:25, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

You haven't yet disclosed a conflict of interest. Would you please tell us your connection with the company? Again, you don't have to tell us your name (we don't want to know) - but you do need to disclose the relationship you have with the company. As Jim said, you shouldn't make any other edits until you have done that, and you understand what follows. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog I thought that my message made it clear that I do have a conflict of interest as Wikipedia defines it, that's why I thanked you for pointing that out. Anyway, I would like you to know that , I am an employee of the organisation in question, although I would like to make it clear I was not being paid to do this or have any financial stake in this. I just felt that the company was notable enough now to warrant a Wikipedia article and I just wanted it to be informational and was definitely not meant as a promotional piece that's why I was asking for help to make it truly neutral. And since you are also experienced on Wikipedia I would love if you could also answer the questions I asked Jim. Would love to have two different takes on it, so that I could actually learn the best practices to be followed on Wikipedia. Aayush2003 (talk) 05:32, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

PS: Why could I not edit other articles, there was a conflict of interest here & not any anywhere else.

To clarify some of your points.

• The company is likely to meet our notability criteria, but you need to provide proper references to support what you claim about it
• You can quote small sections of what other pages say, but you must acknowledge the source, otherwise it's a copyright violation. It's always better, however, to report facts in your own words, and quotes that are just opinions are worthless
• Technically you can edit other articles without declaring a COI if you do not have one, but obviously we both assume that this is the one you want to edit.
• It's always a good idea for inexperienced users to start articles as a draft, so that you can sort out problems with referencing and tone there. If you post directly to article space, you will be given little leeway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jim Thanks for the tips. Now since I can't make a page about the same, I would like to know how can I request the page be made? Can I request you to make one? Also, I forgot to mention, there is one redlink of this company on the Social Analytics page of Wikipedia, given under "See also", which further strengthens the case that it is in fact noteworthy. And when you say start as a draft do you mean offline? or is there a start your page as a draft option in Wikipedia? Also, Could you please answer my question about the neutral point of view, if the Overview part is reduced to a paragraph does the page become purely encyclopedic? (Please refer above, to my detailed question) Also, good to know that I could edit other pages, got a little confused there. PS I really appreciate you guys taking time out to help me understand the nuances of Wikipedia page creation.Aayush2003 (talk) 06:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Requests here. I'm not finding time to write my own articles, let alone do requests, so I'll have to deline. Drafts just formatted as <nowiki>Draft:Your page title<nowiki>. the overview is too much of a sales pitch. the history section, with some more company facts such as number of employees and profits (as mentioned above) might be a better bet TheSandBot (talk) 03:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)