Talk:TEPS
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Comments
This is one of the most unequal articles I've seen so far. While the lead section is filled with requests for citation, the rest are criticisms that are poorly cited:
- Wikipedia frowns upon citations that refers to other Wikipedia articles
- 3 of the citations lead to the homepage of this program and provides whatsoever no reference to the statements concerned.
From the History section, it seems there's a dispute going on, and if so, put it in here, the Talk Page. --BirdKr (talk) 14:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Let me also say that the criticism section reeks of original research, so much that taking them out would wreck the section. While I'm guessing there is some truth to it, whoever wrote it failed to cite it well enough nor does s/he know how to cite well: One citation said "Look at the TEPS test".--BirdKr (talk) 14:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 221.162.214.29
Let me present the flaws in the criticism's citations:
- The ones that refer to cites Wikipedia articles are not valid as it is not deemed "reliable" according to Wikipedia's policy.
- The editorial from Unihope talks about the state of TOEFL for Korean students, and then you expand it with your own analysis (original research) on TEPS.
- The 1st Korea Times article is only used to cite the $$$ of private tutors.
- The 2nd Korean Times article is merely a supplement to the paragraph, not the main point of the paragraph.
- The citation from the KMA article isn't even a citation for the thesis: you're arguing against it.
- There is a HUGE flaw in a Wikipedia article citing itself to verify a statement.
Please address these before you try to put that article back in. If not, I will request this article to be semi-protected and ask for second opinions from others to determine whether it is original research.
--BirdKr (talk) 23:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Even if the problem truly exists in South Korea, you must cite it with reliable sources with statements based on those sources, not from your own opinion/experience. --BirdKr (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Reason for protected page
The IP user has written an essay/section that is generally original research (he even implies it is as a thesis proved as it's read). I have reverted his edits three times with specific reasons and yet he has failed to reply to them and claims it is not original research. S/he has even signed his or her moniker at the end of the section.
I wish for the page to be protected until we resolve the problem of poor citations and original research on the section. --BirdKr (talk) 00:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)