Jacobhaup

Your submission at Articles for creation: Transformational Travel (March 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Transformational Travel and 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 reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 22:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

• In this case, it highly helps to focus with only the simple basics and, next, independent significant coverage about the subject, as this is what gets a better chance, not at acceptance exactly, but at least an assurance of not immediate deletion. SwisterTwister talk 03:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. Please add your messages to the bottom of my talk page, as per the instruction, or they may be overlooked. I deleted your article, following its nomination as "blatant spam", because

• it did not 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, press releases, 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 organisation claims or interviewing its management. You gave no in-line references at all. There was a list of bare urls at the end, but they were not in-line so we can't tell what fact, if any each is supporting. Some at least were clearly not independent third-party sources.
• It's difficult to tell if the topic even meets the notability criteria. I've rarely seen a submission so devoid of actual facts. It's a personal essay with virtually no substantive verifiable factual content
• it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: travel that is consciously designed and experienced so as to the create conditions for profound personal change. Transformational Travel is an amendment to what the traveler understands travel has to offer and thereby pursues. Changing what the traveler sets out to do while traveling, the role it plays in their lives changes everything, or at least everything below the surface.— and that's just the first sentence. The rest is much the same, lots of opinions, no facts
• there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when they are spamlinks to travle company websites.
• the article was created in a single edit without wikilinks or references, and looks as if was copied and pasted from a copyrighted source. 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. 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.
• The TTC team and I were working on that behind the scenes—You have a conflict of interest when editing this article, and you must declare it. Since you work directly or indirectly for the organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged 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 organisation 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:Jacobhaup. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Jacobhaup|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

You seem to have completely misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. This is not social media where you can write what you want, it's an encyclopaedia requiring factual verifiable content, not personal opinions. If you wish to contribute again, please read this. Please note that you should not in any case attempt to write anything on this topic without making the mandatory COI declaration I have described above. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:18, 28 March 2017 (UTC)