Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2015 November 29
| Help desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 28 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 30 > |
| Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
November 29
[edit]01:11:14, 29 November 2015 review of submission by Anonhiststudent
[edit]
How do I draft the section headings of the article in "Wikipedia format?" Thank you.Anonhiststudent (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Anonhiststudent - the short answer is; you don't. Your submission has been permanently declined because there is already an article about Jacob Riis - you are welcome to help improve that article, do not continue working on your draft. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
I do not understand, what kind of sources are missing to make my article notable. And i already pit citations, but it is still recommended to add more.
Klaragi (talk) 18:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
20:57:10, 29 November 2015 review of submission by Melbushr
[edit]
Hello! I am wondering how much longer I can expect to wait until my article is reviewed and hopefully published to the mainspace! I don't mean to be a pest, but my article Draft: Aviation Automation is part of university class project and I've worked really hard to get it published. I've been rejected twice, for seemingly contradictory reasons, but have taken the advice nonetheless and spent a good amount of time trying to improve my article. I would love any help anyone has to offer in adding to my article; however, I really think that the changes I have made and extra links I have created make this article worthy of being at LEAST a stub article. My information is all sourced and well-researched! It is worth noting that this assignment happens to be due on Wednesday and is worth 30% of my final grade. I would appreciate any assistance. Thank you!
Melbushr (talk) 20:57, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Melbushr:
Declined It is, perhaps, foolish of your course leader to require 30% of the grade to be based on things they cannot control, like reviews and the time they take. I would be protesting that regime. We are all volunteers, and we review the things that interest us when we get to them. We try hard to review the oldest material first, but, just sometimes, things linger. Tell them that. Show them this conversation, and tell them that we make precisely no allowances for their timetables when we review drafts. All we care about is the quality of the finished product: Wikipedia. They have an education support team here and they need to be discussing matters with them. Fiddle Faddle 10:23, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- There is no indication, usually in the form of a banner template on the Draft's Talk page, that this draft is part of a properly registered Wikipedia Education Program. Such programs are normally strongly advised to only submit their drafts to AFC Review after they have already been graded. If there is a registered education project for this please give us a link to its page, otherwise please tell us what college and class/course this is related to. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Pinging Ian (Wiki Ed) (found on User talk:Melbushr) - We at AFC must insist that educational assignments are not submitted here until after the student's work has already been graded. Once such a draft is accepted into mainspace it can very quickly be edited quite extensively by Wikipedians who have no connection to the Educational project - thus the article in mainspace will not be entirely the work of the student who created the draft. Please explain to the teacher concerned that student assignments must be graded in sandbox, before moving to mainspace, whether directly or through AFC. Thanks Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:50, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Dodger67, Skearns4, Ian (Wiki Ed), and Melbushr: I have raised this matter assertively on the course leader's talk page. I consider that this course is not as helpful to the students as one might wish at present. They need to have as good an experience here as possible. The course is located here: Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of Western Ontario/Human Factors in Aviation (Fall 2015) I have stressed that I am raising the comments there as my own opinion. It interests me that not only the content here, but the courses, too, are public property. Fiddle Faddle 23:58, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for the help you have offered to this course, but perhaps it would be useful to clarify a few items. As a University Professor, I was approached by the Wiki Education Foundation with a request to see if a Wiki assignment could be incorporated into a university class. Neither myself nor my students are experienced editors, but we have all completed training and are following recommended grading guidelines and process created by the Wiki Ed Foundation. The Wiki Ed Foundation has recently suggested that we do not use the AFC process because of the backlog. With student work, no, formatting will not always be perfect because they are learning to write in a new style. Yes, less-than-perfect articles will be published because it is recommended by the Wiki Ed foundation that students move out of their sandbox and publish in the community early in the learning process so that they can begin to learn about the editing community and the value of peer reviews. If you have questions or concerns about how this course is organized I suggest you contact the Wiki Ed Foundation directly and make suggestions about how assignments similar to this could be restructured in future courses.Skearns4 (talk) 13:19, 1 December 2015 (UTC)