Draft:IntelliSource
 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 2–3 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 869 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
Submission declined on 28 July 2025 by Theroadislong (talk).
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
| Submission declined on 25 July 2025 by RangersRus (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: Declined by RangersRus 6 days ago.
| |
| Submission declined on 24 July 2025 by Stuartyeates (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: Declined by Stuartyeates 7 days ago.
| |
| Submission declined on 22 July 2025 by Rusalkii (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: Declined by Rusalkii 9 days ago.
| |
| Submission declined on 22 July 2025 by Moritoriko (talk). This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject. This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. Declined by Moritoriko 10 days ago. | |
| Submission declined on 19 July 2025 by MediaKyle (talk). This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. Declined by MediaKyle 13 days ago. | |
| Submission declined on 18 July 2025 by Pythoncoder (talk). This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. Declined by Pythoncoder 13 days ago. | |
| Submission declined on 17 July 2025 by Qcne (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. Declined by Qcne 14 days ago. | |
Comment: press releases are not independent sources. Theroadislong (talk) 20:21, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: The sourcing is still not there. These sources are database entries, profiles by the company, or fluffy coverage in a local trade press. None of them meet the high standards of WP:NCORP. I strongly suspect that the sourcing to create this article is simply not there. Rusalkii (talk) 19:27, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Try reading some other short business articles on wikipedia to get ideas of what is good tone. But I don't see sources to support WP:NCORP either so make sure you have those too or it'll keep getting declined. Moritoriko (talk) 01:19, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 | |
| Company type | Private |
|---|---|
| Industry | Business Consulting & Services |
| Founded | 1999 |
| Founder | Robyn Donahue |
| Headquarters | Denver, Colorado, U.S. |
Key people | Jake Donahue (CEO/President), Mark Silvius (Senior Vice President) |
| Website | intellisource |
IntelliSource, LLC is a privately held American company that provides Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), Recruitment Process Outsourcing (RPO), and workforce management services.[1][2] IntelliSource was founded by Robyn Donahue in 1999. The global headquarters is in Denver, Colorado.[3][4]
References
- ^ Bloomberg. "IntelliSource | Bloomberg". www.bloomberg.com.
- ^ Taylor, Mike. "Best of Colorado 2015". Coloradobiz.
- ^ Cunningham, Jennifer. "America's Greatest Workplaces 2025". Newsweek: 5.
- ^ "IntelliSource Gives Away 2022 Tesla to Reno Employee". Northern Nevada Business Weekly.
Category:Outsourcing companies Category:Outsourcing Category:Business process outsourcing companies Category:Recruitment Category:Consulting firms Category:Executive search firms Category:Human resource management consulting firms Category:Employment agencies of the United States Category:Business services companies established in 1999
Categories:
- Draft articles on software
- Draft articles on business and economics
- Draft articles on technology
- AfC submissions on organisations existing today
- Pending AfC submissions
- AfC pending submissions by age/2 days ago
- AfC submissions by date/29 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/28 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/25 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/24 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/22 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/21 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/18 July 2025
- AfC submissions by date/17 July 2025
- in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
- reliable
- secondary
- strictly independent of the subject
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.