User talk:Hillmap
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Oklahoma/Japanese_Environmental_History_(Spring_2020) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Hillmap, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Elysia 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. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:04, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Hillmap
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Crystallizedcarbon and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Oishi Matashichi, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion. The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now visible at the top of the article.
If you wish to prevent the deletion:
- Edit the page
- Remove the text that looks like this:
{{proposed deletion/dated...}} - Click the button.
But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Crystallizedcarbon}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Using your sandbox in the future
[edit]Hi, I saw the article that you had created was proposed for deletion. It was not ready to be in the "mainspace" yet, as it was only a couple of sentences, only had one reference, and wasn't formatted correctly. I've added some content and removed the proposed deletion. In the future, please use your sandbox for drafting articles. Please see this training for drafting in the sandbox, and this training for how to move a draft out of the sandbox once it's ready.
Please carefully follow instructions to avoid having your work deleted! Thanks, Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Article Review by Hannah F.
[edit]Hi Matt! I know you started your article from scratch and I'm really impressed with it.
Lead Guiding questions: • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the introductory sentence is a great summary. • Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not entirely; does not mention the insurance claim. • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, not that I could tell. • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think the lead is a little overly detailed. For example, I would remove the part about his son being stillborn since it is mentioned later in the article. Additionally, I wouldn't mention Kuboyama's death in the lead since it isn't directly related to Oishi. Lead evaluation Overall, the lead looks really good and gives a substantial amount of background information in a concise way.
Content Guiding questions: • Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes, all of the content is relevant. • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I feel like all of the content you added contributes to the article. Content evaluation Overall, you have added a lot of information about Oishi's life and the article is looking good.
Tone and Balance Guiding questions: • Is the content added neutral? Yes. • Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No. • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No. • Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?. No. Tone and balance evaluation The tone is very neutral and balanced, especially considering the topic matter.
Sources and References Guiding questions: • Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes. • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes. • Are the sources current? Yes. • Check a few links. Do they work? Yes. Sources and references evaluation Sources seem current and well-balanced between news articles and his autobiography.
Organization Guiding questions: • Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes. • Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I could see. • Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, the sections are clear. Organization evaluation There are no problems with organization that I can see, especially since you went in chronological order.
Images and Media Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media • Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? n/a • Are images well-captioned? n/a • Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? n/a • Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? n/a Images and media evaluation No images yet. For New Articles Only If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above. Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? New Article Evaluation Overall impressions Guiding questions: • Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? All of the sections you've added are relevant to the topic. • What are the strengths of the content added? It is a good summary of his life and links back to other appropriate articles. • How can the content added be improved? I would maybe add some pictures of him and Lucky Dragon, and maybe create an infobox. Other than that, really impressive work! Overall evaluation