User talk:Azee2
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Azee2, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
The article Alpha education has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- After removal of the primary sources, the reliable sources which remain do not support any of the main topics of the article, only tangential facts.
- The article is essentially unsourced.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cabayi (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- Your text "In Soo Wong's address in Legislature" is supported by a YouTube link. YouTube is not a reliable source. I went to the Hansard transcript but the day your YouTube ref gave, 2016-12-13, wasn't a day that the assembly was sitting. I have to ask, is there any fact in your article which will stand up to even the lightest scrutiny? Cabayi (talk) 12:23, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Alpha education for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alpha education is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha education until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Cabayi (talk) 07:30, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi! I'm the content expert for your course and I wanted to drop a note explaining why the page for Alpha education is up for deletion. Ultimately it looks like the article contained content that didn't seem neutrally written and relies too heavily on primary sources.
It can be difficult to get used to writing in a neutral, encyclopedic tone, especially as this isn't really discouraged per se with academic writing because in some cases there's no reason why a writer shouldn't show passion for a specific side. This is different when it comes to an encyclopedia article on Wikipedia, as we can't show partiality to a specific side or topic. It can be an amazingly noble person or organization (or conversely an article about the scum of the earth), but the reader shouldn't be able to tell where the writer stands by reading the article. This means that we need to avoid non-neutral wording or soapboxing, which again - can be difficult to do when you first start editing. (I know that it took me a while to get used to this!)
As far as sourcing goes, you can use primary sources to back up basic details, however with Wikipedia you need to show where a topic is notable by showing where the organization has gained in-depth coverage in independent, reliable sources. No matter what a primary source claims, it cannot show notability. The general rule of thumb is that if a certain action, award, or distinction is notable, then an independent source will have written about it in-depth. Always make sure that you thoroughly check out the source before using it, especially when it comes to organizations as most will issue press releases that can be reprinted in various outlets. Even though a news outlet may choose to reprint the press release, this isn't seen as a sign of notability since the outlet did not write the piece themselves or fact check the claims.
It's still possible that the article may be saved in some form or fashion, but to keep it as its own article we'll need to find independent, reliable sources. I know that the Wikipedia portion of the class is officially over, but I didn't know if you would be interested in doing this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 08:33, 11 May 2017 (UTC)