Draft talk:Crowd Connected

Response to draftification

Thank you for reviewing this article. I understand and respect the decision to return it to draft space.

I have declared my conflict of interest on my user page and will continue to work to ensure the article meets Wikipedia's neutrality and sourcing standards. The content is based on independent coverage including BBC News and the Alan Turing Institute report, which I believe satisfy the notability criteria for organisations under WP:GNG and WP:ORG.

I will review the tone again for any remaining promotional phrasing before resubmitting.

–– JC-crowd (talk) 14:50, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Follow-up after rewrite

The draft has now been fully rewritten to address previous concerns about promotional tone. Repetitive or company-sourced material was removed, and the text relies mainly on independent references (BBC, Alan Turing Institute, University of Surrey, Innovate UK, UKRI, IQ Magazine, UKTN). Sections were condensed for clarity, and all wording reviewed for neutrality.

If any editors are available to take a quick look before resubmission through AfC, feedback would be appreciated.

–– JC-crowd (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Response to AfC reviewer

@CNMall41: Thank you for your review and feedback. I’ve updated the draft to address the WP:THREE request by adding further independent sources intended to better address WP:CORPDEPTH. I think the strongest sources providing significant coverage are:

• BBC News (2020) – national media article discussing event crowd management and use of Crowd Connected’s technology.
• Pollstar (2018) – detailed feature describing the company’s operations, clients, and product development context.
• MoveTheNeedle.News (2025) – independent analysis covering the company’s evolution from live event deployments to broader spatial-intelligence applications.

If these are judged insufficient under WP:CORPDEPTH, I’d appreciate any guidance on which aspects (depth, independence, or reliability) are considered lacking so I can locate stronger replacements or supplementary sources before resubmission.

–– JC-crowd (talk) 22:00, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Links to sources?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

BBC News

Pollstar

MoveTheNeedle JC-crowd (talk) 07:15, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@CNMall41: Just noting that I’ve added the requested links above for reference. Please let me know if any further detail or context would help with the review. –-JC-crowd (talk) 09:30, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Unfortunately, I do not see these as meeting WP:CORPDEPTH. The BBC article is not focused on the company and the section that does discuss it is made up mainly of quotes from the company. The other two do not appear to be reliable. I will leave the review to another reviewer as I would likely decline it based on notability concerns. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

November 2025 Update: Address CORPDEPTH with Gartner & Business Surrey

I have significantly overhauled the draft to address the feedback regarding WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:THREE.

Key Improvements:

• Added High-Quality Analyst Coverage: I have integrated the 2022 Gartner "Cool Vendor" report (ID G00755622). This provides the deep, independent technical analysis that was previously missing.
• Removed Weak Sources: Per the reviewer's feedback on reliability, I have removed MoveTheNeedle and other promotional sources.
• Verified Technical Claims: I cross-referenced the article against the full text of the Gartner report and corrected the technical description (replacing generic "GPS/Wi-Fi" claims with the specific "inertial sensor" technology cited in the analyst report).

Current Sourcing Strategy: The draft now relies on four distinct tiers of secondary coverage:

1. Gartner (2022): Independent analyst coverage (Technical/Industry depth).
2. Pollstar (2018): Established trade journalism (founded 1981, member of Associated Press) to provide sector application depth, distinct from the removed blogs.
3. BBC News (2020): National media coverage (General notability).
4. Business Surrey (2025): Regional business coverage (verifying inclusion in the 2025 UK Fast Growth Index).

Note on Verification (WP:PAYWALL): Regarding the Gartner citation: This is a subscription-only analyst report. I have cited it using the **Report ID (G00755622)**.

To assist reviewers in verifying the technical claims without requiring a subscription, here are the relevant verbatim excerpts from the report (p. 4):

• **On Technology:** "Its positioning engine leverages the inertial sensors from a smartphone... Once the transmitters such as Bluetooth beacons... are plotted... the Sail system is ready to go."
• **On Use Cases:** "The main value propositions are... providing physical businesses with data tools for customer experience analytics."

These excerpts directly support the article's text regarding "inertial sensors" and "Bluetooth signals."

I believe this combination directly addresses the previous finding that the BBC article lacked sufficient independent analysis and that supporting sources were unreliable. By supplementing the BBC coverage with deep analyst reporting (Gartner) and verifying facts with established trade journalism (Pollstar), the draft now satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH.

JC-crowd (talk) 15:15, 10 December 2025 (UTC)