Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Training as a squad in a virtual environment

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Training as a squad in a virtual environment

edit

Deprodded by creator with the rationale "article not complete. Content still being added. References to be added to support content once content more fleshed out and direction established." But I find it hard to believe that this article, given its title, will ever become anything other than a how-to guide (which Wikipedia is not). The article creator seems to be more concerned with my OR concerns, but the current version reads very much like an essay and sourcing it is not going to help with that, and I'm not seeing it going in the direction of less essay-like. As an added bonus, there appears to be plenty of POV ("Never use your pistol") and an "Acknowledgements" section where people are asked to sign the page. Apparently the creator mistakes us for some other wiki. Morgan Wick 19:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: article creator removed the AfD tag, although he appeared to mistake it for being the equivalent of a prod or speedy tag. He says he's very new to Wikipedia, so don't bite. Keep your comments to the problems with the article, and encourage him to contribute on appropriate topics and legit articles. Morgan Wick 20:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Still learning how to operate in the wiki world and what kind of comment goes where so please please bear with me. Apparently i've found the right place to type something for once. So, apparently there is a 5 day period for the notice then deletion happens automatically? What if the decision is to not delete automatically? Where is that decision made? By whom? Whose responsibility is it to remove the delete tag before the 5 days are up if the decision is to not delete? What if the decision is to not delete and nobody removes the tag? I really don't understand.
So, I need to reference and make the article more factual, support the arguments and then i won't lose all my hard work? I need help understanding this. I've been pointed to the three cardinal rules for wiki and still am having some trouble. There are other wikis on my subject and they state opinions as well but they are accepted such as [[1]] which reads similarly to mine. i do not see how my article is any different than that article once I add some links and references and in general make it look more professional.
I am really trying to understand. Please help me out.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 22ndmech (talk • contribs)
    • No sweat, 22ndmech. Most of the information at AfD is linked from that tag, but you can just go to Wikipedia:Deletion policy and Wikipedia:Guide to deletion to find out more. In brief, there appear to be two related problems with the article you are writing. First, it does not cite any secondary or primary sources, as required by our verifiability policy. Because wikipedia is an encyclopedia or a tertiary (third) source, it can only contain information that has already been published in a reliable source. Instead, it looks as though this article is based on your own experience, and so it's original research. Whereas an academic journal or a gamers' magazine might contain someone else's original research, those publications contain peer-review, vetting, or fact-checking mechanisms that wikipedia lacks and is not in a position to provide. As it is, we only have your word for it that everything in this article is true, or at least verifiable. While I believe you, it's hard for the casual reader to verify any of this if it hasn't been published elsewhere, so articles like this usually get deleted. As to your point about that other article, I started a quick essay in response to this common point at WP:INN that will hopefully answer your question. The section you linked to may not belong in wikipedia either. Finally, I reformatted your comment above a bit (usually people don't do that when it's other people's comments, but I figured you wouldn't mind here) and added an unsigned tag. You can sign your comments on talk pages and AfD's with four tildes, like so: ~~~~. Cheers!--Chaser T 21:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my comment above. This could be easily userfied to User:22ndmech/sandbox until the creator can find sources for it and repost it. The AfD will take five days, so there's also plenty of time before it closes.--Chaser T 21:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Sorry to do this as the user obviously wants to contribute something and it's not nice to bite, but WP:NOT specifically states Wikipedia articles should not include instruction - advice ( legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes.. This article is clearly a how-to guide and I can't see it can ever be anything else (otherwise I'd try and help save it). Yomangani 23:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Thankyou --Chaser! (i'm slowly learning the formatting conventions... personally i had an easier time learning thai :). That sandbox comment is extremely helpful! I was dumbfounded that articles would get sandbagged before they had been completed and figured that there must be a place where you can work on something in peace first. Otherwise all wiki's would have to be complete in one attempt, like zeus jumping fully grown from his father's head (ie: possible, not probable). I'll do some work and figure out that sandbox thing. Can you define "userfied" as it seems to be local-lingo? Also, i'm with you for the video game guide rule, i understand & agree that scans of manuals don't belong here. My goal is strictly factual information in a collaborative environment that my co-players can assist with as it is a huge topic and too big to tackle on my own. Give me a few and i'll surprise you. As for the content of the article and people's disbelief in it's eventual merit, hell, my dad didn't think i was going anywhere either ;) 22ndmech 02:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Speedy Delete as a) this is original creator and b) article is now userfied. Morgan Wick 03:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • (edit conflict) I took the liberty of creating a userpage for you at User:22ndmech. You can get to it quickly from a link at the very top of the browser window whenever you are logged in to wikipedia. There is also a link there to your sandbox, where I've copied the article under discussion. Again, normally wikipedians don't edit pages in each other's user space, but in this case, it seemed appropriate. After you learn the rules, you learn when you can break them. Cheers!--Chaser T 03:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Training_as_a_squad_in_a_virtual_environment&oldid=1070769661"