Hello,
In response to your message on my talk page, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development article is in need of sources other than the organization's own website. Specifically, it needs citations from what Wikipedia considers reliable sources (click both of those blue links for the appropriate guidelines and policy). While it's true that an organization's own website can be used as a source for some material in an article, if there are no other 3rd-party reliable sources that can be used to back up the article's contents, then it might fail notability criteria.
I hope this clears things up. Let me know if you have any further concerns or questions. --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok if the guidelines are unclear, then here's the story in a nutshell: it doesn't matter if the organization states that everything in the article is correct and factual. What matter is whether other sources (reliable sources) contain information about the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Major newspapers magazines are good examples of reliable sources.
- I see you've added some links to the references section of the article. I'll discuss them here, and perhaps this will better explain what is missing from the article
- The www.get.hobsons.co.uk link: doesn't appear to meet WP:RS criteria
- The www.charity-commission.gov.uk link: this appears to be just a general link to a website. If there is specific information at this website about the Institute, please adjust the link to point to it - or even better turn it into a proper citation.
- The www.privy-council.org.uk link: while useful for background information, I see no mention of the Institute at this particular link. Again see above about adjusting links to point to specific relevant information about the Institute
- The www.iipuk.co.uk link: no mention of the Institute on this page either.
- --AbsolutDan (talk) 12:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry that you're feeling frustrated. I'm not trying to prevent you from editing. All I'm saying is that the article is in need of proper citations. If reliable sources have published material that discusses/describes the Institute, then we need proper cites to that material, not just links to their website. Think of a Wikipedia as a research paper - you can't just say "this organization can vouch for the Institute", you need to cite the material where they talk about it. Please read through WP:CITE for information and examples about how citations should be added. Thanks --AbsolutDan (talk) 13:06, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Great - the link amendments are a good start. The article is no longer in need of the {{unreferenced}}, so I will not be re-adding it. At some point it'd be a good idea to turn those links into proper citations, but for now this article now passes inclusion criteria. Thank you --AbsolutDan (talk) 13:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]