User talk:RagnarFsks

Welcome and about your Yaleworlfellows draft

Hi, I have reviewed your draft in your sandbox and here a some important suggestions for improvement:

The main issue here is that the article lacks significant independent sources like mainstream news articles etc...there must be some coverage right? Reference 1 to 10 all belong to something associated with Yale (Yalenews etc). This is not recommended as they are WP:PRIMARY sources and are not independent nor third-party. I would recommend you find some good news articles or any other sources, see what content in this draft is verifiable to that and shorten it accordingly. Unfortunately, majority of the article content seems to rely on them and this counts are being weakly sourced. Any editor can challenge such content and it can to be removed if you don't find any good references. If there is nothing available, the only way is to shorten it I'm afraid. It's fine if this encyclopaedic article on this topic ends up being short but well-sourced, ideally that's how any article should be.
Reference 11 (Office of President Clinton) is a WP:dead link, replace it with a proper working link if possible.
In all other terms, the article is decent enough, complies with the manner of style and written okay...nice work.

Please try to address these problems and reply here, after that's done I'll tell you when it can be moved to the mainspace and replace the current Yale World Fellows Program article. After that, I'll make further edits on it if necessary. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:29, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Updated Draft

Ugog Nizdast:

An updated draft without most of the Yale-associated news sources is in my sandbox. The only things that still source Yale-associated news sources are basic facts, such as the year the program was founded and the number of fellows. These were unfortunately not available elsewhere, but as facts are not subject to non-independent third party bias, so I believe they should be alright as is. Take a look.

Thanks, RagnarFsks (talk) 20:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've consulted with someone else (See link) and it seems fine. You can go ahead and replace the original, then we'll see if there are any necessary changes (other than minor corrections) left to me made. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:20, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]