Talk:Daxbot

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject banner shell |class=Start |1=

{{WikiProject Articles for creation |ts=20260425153303 |reviewer=StAnselm |oldid=1351036271}}

{{WikiProject Technology}}

{{WikiProject Technology}}

{{WikiProject Oregon}}

{{WikiProject Oregon}}

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/meet-daxbot-the-robot-patrolling-parts-of-austin/ [[User:Skaers|Skaers]] ([[User talk:Skaers|talk]]) 03:05, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/meet-daxbot-the-robot-patrolling-parts-of-austin/ [[User:Skaers|Skaers]] ([[User talk:Skaers|talk]]) 03:05, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

== Comments left by AfC reviewers ==

{{AFC comment|1=Well done on creating the draft, and it ''may'' potentially meet the relevant requirements (including [[WP:GNG]], [[WP:NCORP]]) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is '''''notable'''''. Essentially subjects are presumed ''notable'' if they have received significant coverage in ''multiple published'' {{strong|[[Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources|secondary sources]]}} that are {{strong|[[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable]]}}, ''intellectually independent'' of each other, and {{strong|[[Wikipedia:Independent sources|independent of the subject]]}}. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles [[HELP:YFA| ‘Your First Article’]], [[Help:Referencing for beginners| ‘Referencing for Beginners’]] and [[WP:ERB| ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’]]. In short, ''"notability"'' requires reliable sources ''about'' the subject, rather than ''by'' the subject.

Please note that some of the references would appear to be from sources that are NOT considered {{strong|[[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable]]}} for establishing notability and should be removed (including blogs, company websites, press releases, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, Spotify etc).

Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see [[WP:PROMO]]), which [[WP:NOT|Wikipedia is not]].

The draft does not appear to show that the subject has any notability beyond the average coverage in trade publications for similar corporations (see [[WP:ROTM]]).

Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being the subject, you must declare that on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). In instances of a conflict of interest, the review of the page needs to be handled with care, mindful of the higher bar set by pages produced in circumstances of such a conflict. Such pages typically may read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see [[WP:PROMO]]), which [[WP:NOT|Wikipedia is not]]; and/or contain prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see [[WP:PEACOCK]] and [[WP:NPV]]).

Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page.

It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the [[Draft talk:{{PAGENAME}}|draft's talk page]], the [[WP:THREE]] best sources that establish [[WP:N|notability]] of the subject.

It would also be helpful if you could please identify ''with specificity'', exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:NCORP criteria #3, because XXXXX").

Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on [[User talk:Cabrils|my talk page]], including the name of the draft page, and I would be happy to reassess. [[User:Cabrils|Cabrils]] ([[User talk:Cabrils|talk]]) 03:19, 13 December 2025 (UTC)}}