Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/Nominations/Archives/2021/4

History of spaceflight

History of spaceflight – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 133 (have reached to 2500) daily hits

Although it is an article with vital importance in many WikiProjects, but it is in a very bad page. Although the article looks quite long, but most of them are very short descriptions, with little citations. The article formatting needs to be improved as well, and writing styles seems all over the place. I can see many things that this articles can be improved, such as merging or relocate sections together, or even seperating this article, because if this article gets fully developed, it can potentialy contain way too much information. DrifAssault (talk) 13:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support This article can do more improvement and expanding. SVcode(Talk) 13:50, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dial (talk) 22:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Would benefit from various edits to enhance the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yu Wensheng

Yu Wensheng – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 7 daily hits

This is a newly-created human rights/political persecution article. It has gotten significant media coverage, and Yu Wensheng's secret trial and sentencing was condemned internationally. It can be substantially improved by our collective effort, thus deserving and earning more daily hits. Thomas Meng (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1. Oppose Almost no traffic. To improve the article, I'd suggest seeking out someone who knows Chinese and asking them to translate. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose It seems a little silly for you to create an article, as you created this one—an article with almost no edits in its history other than your own!—only to announce here that your own work is so low-quality it needs collective efforts to "improve" it. To be honest, when I look at that article, you may have a point, though likely not the point you intended: I'm not sure the topic is notable enough to merit a separate article on Wikipedia. I'll further note that your approach here, compared to the rock-bottom number of daily hits for the article, makes the the article itself suspect to me under WP:NEUT and standards of relevance. It's not the job of Wikipedia to drum up interest in a topic you find personally important through an article about it that "earns" daily hits. You have that exactly backwards: hits suggest relevance to a general audience, which in turn drives priorities for improvement. ComicsAreJustAllRight (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
3. Oppose This article has very few hits and I think it can be expanded by someone who knows Chinese. SVcode(Talk) 17:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not approved North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:54, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]