Talk:HB Antwerp

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 5 July 2023 by reviewer Ca (talk · contribs).

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Gemology and Jewelry

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gemology and JewelryWikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryTemplate:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryGemology and Jewelry articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

Margxx (talk · contribs) has been paid by HB Antwerp on their behalf. Their editing has included contributions to this article. declared on user pagfe

Answer to your question[edit]

Hi Margxx,

I have answered to the question you left on my Talk page. Please, find there some suggestions and clues to improve the draft of your page. I have seen the disclaimer put on your user page and also on this talk page: you are paid by your company to write a Wikipedia page on it. I had no time to first read the Wikipedia guidelines and recommendations on the topic and the ethical aspects related to the question. I just answered to your question as I would do for another user, or a beginner, trying to stick to the spirit of Wikipedia and also according to my own values and personal philosophy with common sense. I tried to answer in a direct way, sometimes liven up by some physico-chemical notions of crystal growth because Wikipedia pages could also be slowly growing as diamond. The message is that a nucleus (a new page) only survives if it satisfies to a certain number of criteria of minimal size and intrinsic quality. I hope it was understandable ;-). I assume you will follow all the Wikipedia rules and recommendations. Welcome and good contribution. Best regards, Shinkolobwe (talk) 23:45, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shinkolobwe, wow! Thank you so much for taking the time to look this over, and for giving me such detailed, practical advice on your Talk page. I really appreciate it, and will look through the draft and make edits accordingly. If you have ideas or suggestions at any point, I welcome your additions. Thanks again, Margxx (talk) 08:11, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Margxx, thank you for your answer. I think the best for you is to first consider the objectives of Wikipedia and its readers. Why, and when, do we consult an encyclopedia? When we have a question about a subject that we do not know. When we wish to learn more. When we are curious. You can share your knowledge with others and contribute to improve the content of Wikipedia, or simply to embellish it: that is the main motivation of volunteer editors. Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion, nor for advertising: imagine what it would be. Simply think to the normal reader, to the public. Many readers could be interested by the techniques and the methods developed by this company to cut and polish diamonds. Does it exist publicly available, and preferably also peer-reviewed, information on the topic in professional journals in the field of jewelry (technical and scientific information)? Developing these aspects would be useful for Wikipedia and its readers. In this perspective, a factual and neutral page makes sense. Promotion and advertising have not their place on Wikipedia, only information useful for the encyclopedia and its readers. If as many persons, you often read yourself Wikipedia and appreciate it (with its limitations because it is not perfect and can be edited by anyone), simply contribute as a reader, curious and eager to learn. Wikipedia is like a precious diamond and we need to preserve and to polish it for the common good and the interest of everyone. To know more about the objectives and the philosophy of Wikipedia, including important ethical aspects to respect, simply follow the links (WP:PAID and WP:COIRESPONSE) mentioned in the template you added to the Talk page when you disclosed your affilation and situation of conflict of interest (see also WP:COI). I only discovered these links after having finished to answer to your question on my talk page, because I did not immediately open the talk page of your draft page here (I only looked at your user page where your COI situation is also mentioned), but I think my answer was conform to the general philosophy of Wikipedia (see WP:Contributing to Wikipedia). When contacting other editors, the best would also to directly disclose your affiliation and situation of conflict of interest in the message. It would also be well advised to centralize all the discussions on the talk page of your draft page, i.e., here, to avoid fragmentation of the discussion and to allow other editors and administrators to also have a good overview of the situation. Best wishes, Shinkolobwe (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shinkolobwe, thank you so much for your insight. I really appreciate it. I will continue to work on improving the draft with your advice in mind. All the best, Margxx (talk) 09:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review per your request[edit]

Hi Margxx I took a look at your article and I think it'll be tagged as being promotional. There are some interesting facts there, but my gut says that these might be better initially integrated into other pages -- the NFT page can talk about NFT diamonds, etc. until there's enough meat to really build a full article. I think the page I did on Mars House might be rolled into the larger NFT article for now as it's a tiny little article as well, even though it meets notability standards. I think this one needs more time and more news. Being a new company in a really hot space (blockchain/NFTs) I'm sure more media coverage will happen, it just takes time. I know it's not much, but I hope that helps a little. The Real Serena Joy^Talk 20:35, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TheRealSerenaJoy thanks so much for taking a look! I'll continue to work on this and see where the community takes it. Best of luck with the problem you're dealing with. 213.214.54.98 (talk) 08:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Good luck to you on your article. The Real Serena Joy^Talk 17:06, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revisions[edit]

Hi Greenman, I'm pinging you here after seeing the message on your Talk page. Thank you for taking the time to look over the draft. I greatly appreciate the feedback, and have attempted to remove/clarify any remaining information that could be seen as promotional. If you'd be willing to give it another look and let me know if you see any other issues (or make changes to the draft yourself), I'd really appreciate it.

Any other editors who happen upon this draft are more than welcome to comment as well. Thanks again, Margxx (talk) 13:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process[edit]

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thank you for the WP:PAID declaration and nice article submission!

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:09, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]