User talk:HighKing: Difference between revisions
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
== BFL Draft Question == |
== BFL Draft Question == |
||
Hi HighKing. Could you please help me by reviewing the below links and explaining to me so that I understand why they do not qualify based on the descriptions that you mentioned? I believe that this is independent coverage not introduced by the company and these are not passing references. If you believe that the coverage is not independent, I would like to understand the criteria for which this assessment is made on Wikipedia so that I can find the right links. I am a bit confused generally, because the previous editor made the comment that the topic does not have significant coverage, but the editor before said that stated that it does and the page was ready for publication. The comment regarding the "organization" versus the "founder and management" -- it seems that the majority of the reporting journalists always write about the founder extensively as part of their coverage of the company and its products, because they believe that she has an intriguing background. But I don't believe that this negates the coverage itself. And this seems to be an issue of debate between the editors. I introduced some of the additional links to give the editors an understanding of the company's scale. The Government of Moscow is stating on its own website that this is the largest company in Russia in the sector, while the Russian Government's official export center is stating that it is one of Russia's flagship exporters. I just thought this was important for the reviewing editors to see, so that they understand that this is a very significant and not a fly-by-night company. I really do not agree that all the references "rely on announcements or interviews or information provided by the company." Before The Moscow Times or CNN or Intellinews or Kommersant (Russia's WSJ) covers a story, they seriously vet it. Any legitimate source does. For instance, CNN maybe covered on average per year as part of the below-linked program (this is a guesstimate) 25 or 30 companies maximum. And the companies that are covered are all notable, or else they wouldn't be featured. So the fact that a story includes quotes or an interview from a subject means nothing, if we are talking about reputable media. I say this as someone who has worked and continues to work as a business/finance editor for news publications for the past 20 years. For |
Hi HighKing. Could you please help me by reviewing the below links and explaining to me so that I understand why they do not qualify based on the descriptions that you mentioned? I believe that this is independent coverage not introduced by the company and these are not passing references. If you believe that the coverage is not independent, I would like to understand the criteria for which this assessment is made on Wikipedia so that I can find the right links. I am a bit confused generally, because the previous editor made the comment that the topic does not have significant coverage, but the editor before said that stated that it does and the page was ready for publication. The comment regarding the "organization" versus the "founder and management" -- it seems that the majority of the reporting journalists always write about the founder extensively as part of their coverage of the company and its products, because they believe that she has an intriguing background. But I don't believe that this negates the coverage itself. And this seems to be an issue of debate between the editors. I introduced some of the additional links to give the editors an understanding of the company's scale. The Government of Moscow is stating on its own website that this is the largest company in Russia in the sector, while the Russian Government's official export center is stating that it is one of Russia's flagship exporters. I just thought this was important for the reviewing editors to see, so that they understand that this is a very significant and not a fly-by-night company. I really do not agree that all the references "rely on announcements or interviews or information provided by the company." Before The Moscow Times or CNN or Intellinews or Kommersant (Russia's WSJ) covers a story, they seriously vet it. Any legitimate source does. For instance, CNN maybe covered on average per year as part of the below-linked program (this is a guesstimate) 25 or 30 companies maximum. And the companies that are covered are all notable, or else they wouldn't be featured. So the fact that a story includes quotes or an interview from a subject means nothing, if we are talking about reputable media. I say this as someone who has worked and continues to work as a business/finance editor for news publications for the past 20 years. For example, it would be an error in my opinion to assume that this article (https://www.intellinews.com/former-model-s-biofood-bars-are-the-new-face-of-russia-s-health-food-industry-126803) is based on information the company provided. How do you know the information does not come from research by the journalists and editors? I think this would be a wrongful assumption. One has to make the assumption based on the quality and legitimacy of a publication, because there is no way ever to really know. And this publication is owned by a former bureau chief of the Daily Telegraph, an economics correspondent for The Sunday Telegraph and a foreign correspondent for publications in London, Tokyo and Paris. (I am taking this directly from their website.) And it is also a "journalists' journalism" site, i.e. a site where from a lot of foreign correspondents in Central and Eastern Europe pull information and story ideas. (I know because I worked in media in the region for a long time.) I have no skin in this game but coming on my hundredth edit for this story, I am just kind of confused, because this company is in fact very notable and much more notable than many other companies on this website, and I thought I had gotten it to the point of publication, but then another and now a second editor are saying it is still not ready. |
||
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/11/12/russian-health-food-startup-soars-during-pandemic-a72008 |
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/11/12/russian-health-food-startup-soars-during-pandemic-a72008 |
||
Revision as of 04:43, 31 July 2021
| This is HighKing's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
You are welcome to leave messages here. If you place a message here, then I will reply here (rather than on, say, your user page). Conversely, if I've left a message on your talk page, please tag me by using something like {{u|HighKing}} so I'll be notified and will reply on your Talk page.
Why my article is rejected?
Hi, my article for Guilherme Hirose was rejected by you. But it MEETS the criteria for that kind of musician, since the artist is the ALL responsible for entering the JAPANESE CHARTS FOUR TIMES, and it is also member of a INTERNATIONAL SUPERGROUP with a WORLD TOUR scheduled.
Request on 01:25:10, 31 July 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by YCC Lisa
What if I couldn't find any other resources that talk about the organization, since it is a organization in Vietnam.
YCC Lisa (talk) 01:25, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
BFL Draft Question
Hi HighKing. Could you please help me by reviewing the below links and explaining to me so that I understand why they do not qualify based on the descriptions that you mentioned? I believe that this is independent coverage not introduced by the company and these are not passing references. If you believe that the coverage is not independent, I would like to understand the criteria for which this assessment is made on Wikipedia so that I can find the right links. I am a bit confused generally, because the previous editor made the comment that the topic does not have significant coverage, but the editor before said that stated that it does and the page was ready for publication. The comment regarding the "organization" versus the "founder and management" -- it seems that the majority of the reporting journalists always write about the founder extensively as part of their coverage of the company and its products, because they believe that she has an intriguing background. But I don't believe that this negates the coverage itself. And this seems to be an issue of debate between the editors. I introduced some of the additional links to give the editors an understanding of the company's scale. The Government of Moscow is stating on its own website that this is the largest company in Russia in the sector, while the Russian Government's official export center is stating that it is one of Russia's flagship exporters. I just thought this was important for the reviewing editors to see, so that they understand that this is a very significant and not a fly-by-night company. I really do not agree that all the references "rely on announcements or interviews or information provided by the company." Before The Moscow Times or CNN or Intellinews or Kommersant (Russia's WSJ) covers a story, they seriously vet it. Any legitimate source does. For instance, CNN maybe covered on average per year as part of the below-linked program (this is a guesstimate) 25 or 30 companies maximum. And the companies that are covered are all notable, or else they wouldn't be featured. So the fact that a story includes quotes or an interview from a subject means nothing, if we are talking about reputable media. I say this as someone who has worked and continues to work as a business/finance editor for news publications for the past 20 years. For example, it would be an error in my opinion to assume that this article (https://www.intellinews.com/former-model-s-biofood-bars-are-the-new-face-of-russia-s-health-food-industry-126803) is based on information the company provided. How do you know the information does not come from research by the journalists and editors? I think this would be a wrongful assumption. One has to make the assumption based on the quality and legitimacy of a publication, because there is no way ever to really know. And this publication is owned by a former bureau chief of the Daily Telegraph, an economics correspondent for The Sunday Telegraph and a foreign correspondent for publications in London, Tokyo and Paris. (I am taking this directly from their website.) And it is also a "journalists' journalism" site, i.e. a site where from a lot of foreign correspondents in Central and Eastern Europe pull information and story ideas. (I know because I worked in media in the region for a long time.) I have no skin in this game but coming on my hundredth edit for this story, I am just kind of confused, because this company is in fact very notable and much more notable than many other companies on this website, and I thought I had gotten it to the point of publication, but then another and now a second editor are saying it is still not ready.
https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2491212
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=10155128115313067 (CNN)
JohannesburgBlues (talk) 04:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)JohannesburgBlues