User talk:Soc221 ekmill
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Michigan/Social_Inequality_-_Winter_2018_(Winter_2018) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Soc221 ekmill, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor 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. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Article moved
[edit]Hi, I noticed that your article on residential mobility was moved to Draft:Residential Mobility because it wasn't ready to be moved live yet.
One of the main issues is that the article is completely unsourced, as there's no way to tell where you got the information from. It doesn't mean that it's necessarily wrong, just that without sourcing there's no way to verify that the information is correct. You need in-line sourcing for this. I do see where you mention one source, but you'll need multiple sources. Avoid relying on one source.
I'm also concerned that this reads more like an essay that reflects upon and interprets the data in ways that the source material doesn't explicitly state. On Wikipedia we can only summarize content written elsewhere, as synthesizing new material is seen as original research. You also need to be careful of tenses and tone. Avoid words like "we", as the article shouldn't be written like it's directed at or written by a specific person.
Make sure that you use multiple sources, as you need to make sure that you have a wide variety of research to pull from, to ensure that the material is in depth. You also need to consider a global viewpoint, as many sources will only cover a very small, specific area. What's true for say, California may not be true for Maine, or the United States for Japan. Be extremely careful with studies. Only include those if you have secondary sourcing to show where the study's research has been covered and discussed by others. The reason for this is that a study is seen as a primary source for its research and conclusions, even if published in a reputable journal or done alongside notable people or organizations. The secondary coverage will help show that the research is good and that it's worth highlighting in the article. Basically, the secondary sourcing helps show why this study is more worth of being mentioned over another.
Also avoid point of view comments and phrases like "it is not incredibly shocking to believe". This is seen as an opinion, as this is something that may be indeed shocking to some audiences.
Finally, you may need to summarize this a bit more, as the article should only contain a very basic, general overview of the topic and shouldn't go too in-depth into one particular study or population, putting undue weight in that area.
All that said, this is a really interesting topic area so I look forward to seeing your improvements! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Residential Mobility
[edit]
Hello, Soc221 ekmill. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Residential Mobility".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 06:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)