User talk:Ardalby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am always available for criticism!

[edit] AfD nomination of Student Approaches to Learning

I have nominated Student Approaches to Learning, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Student Approaches to Learning. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? LegoTech·(t)·(c) 04:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Faith in Wikipedia as a Project

My Faith in the Wikipedia has been shattered. I cannot consider that it is a useful project while it has editors than cannot even read their own policies and interpret them correctly. It says no original work and I agree as you want verifiable content. But how is it possible to write any articles in the humanities without just copying out an Encyclopedia Britannica entry if you are going to meet the OR criteria a applied by the article police! I have been taught not the plagiarise and to use my own words. To present a subject which has a wide literature requires synthesis. It should be unbiased - so it should synthesise all the different views and not draw conclusions beyond the literature used. This falls completely within the defined policy and I would request some detailed reasoning as to what made my article an OR essay.

[edit] Um

...could I ask why you chose to complain to me, rather than to user:JForget? I had nothing to do with the deletion of your submission. DS (talk) 21:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I have initially deleted since there was basically no chance for this article to survive the AFD vote (thus to be kept). I had basically followed the procedure there as a unanimous delete vote with at least 4 or more votes basically gets deleted out after a few days sometimes faster. As for the content the raison why I beleive they say it is written like an essay is that it is basically written like some sort of a resume/analysis work of a subject/thesis much like many college and university students are doing in like researches, reports, analysis, etc. Academic works are generally essays and essays and original research are not recommended per Wikipedia guidelines as [[Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.

Also, there is not even a lead and explanation on the title of the article. If you want to improve on it you can ask me for a copy of the deleted content in order to make the improvements on it. Please follow WP:MOS for guidelines on how the article should be like.

Here's some helpful links since no one placed a welcome message in April.

• Community Portal
• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

--JForget 02:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the reponse I would appreciate a copy of the article so that it can be improved and returned to the site.Ardalby (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

See User:Ardalby/Student Approaches to Learning for the copy of it. When the changes are made and do comply with the various policies, it can go to Wikipedia:Deletion review to see if it passes. I think maybe I should also give you the link to Wikipedia:Notability as this is another key component on the existance of an article - I know it was not the issue here but it might be a guide as well for other articles in the future you might want to create. Thanks! --JForget 17:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I am aware of the guides to notability as I put in my comments regarding an article on William Perry that had been marked as not notable. Perry was a very significant educationalist although not widely known outside this field as opposed to the Fridge - William Perry who is publicly notable but who did not have a particularly significant career apart from being a large lump and who is undisputedly notable. So the notability criteria do not impress me and are one reason why wikipedia is intellectually unsound. Only articles about popular subjects are permitted not those about significant subjects. Other examples are the suidice of a BBC children's TV presenter, the live of pron stars and their preferred sexual scenes etc....