User:Geofferybard/draftchecklistforOR

CHECKLIST

Basis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#PUBLISHER

Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought Policy shortcuts: WP:FORUM WP:NOT#CHAT WP:NOTESSAY WP:NOT#ESSAY WP:NOT#FANSITE WP:NOT#FORUM WP:NOT#OR "WP:FORUM" redirects here; you may be looking for Wikipedia:Forum shopping or Wikipedia:Village pump.

1
Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information. Per our policy on original research, please do not use Wikipedia for any of the following:

===a=== Primary (original) research, such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have completed primary research on a topic, publish your results in other venues, such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, or respected online sites. Wikipedia can report about your work once it is published and becomes part of accepted knowledge; however, citations of such reliable sources are needed to demonstrate that material is verifiable, and not merely the editor's opinion. ===b===  Personal inventions. If you or a friend invented the word frindle, a drinking game, or a new type of dance move, it is not notable enough to be an article until multiple, independent, and reliable secondary sources report on it. Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. ===c=== Personal essays that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinion of experts). Although Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge, it is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of such knowledge. In the unusual situation where the opinions of an individual are important enough to discuss, it is preferable to let other people write about them. Personal essays on topics relating to Wikipedia are welcome in your user namespace or on the Meta-wiki. There is a Wikipedia fork at Wikinfo that encourages personal opinions in articles. ===d=== Discussion forums. Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. You can chat with people about Wikipedia-related topics on their user talk pages, and should resolve problems with articles on the relevant talk pages, but please do not take discussion into articles. In addition, bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles. Talk pages are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article, nor are they a helpdesk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. If you wish to ask a specific question on a topic, Wikipedia has a Reference desk, and questions should be asked there rather thatake discussion into articles.n on talk pages. Wikipedians who wish to hold casual discussions with fellow Wikipedians can use the IRC channels, such as #wikipedia. Note that this is an IRC channel, not a message board. There are also a number of early-stage projects that attempt to use a wiki for discussion and debate. Material unsuitable for talk pages may be subject to removal per the talk page guidelines.

e
Although Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge, it is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of such knowledge. In the unusual situation where the opinions of an individual are important enough to discuss, it is preferable to let other people write about them. Personal essays on topics relating to Wikipedia are welcome in your user namespace or on the Meta-wiki. There is a Wikipedia fork at Wikinfo that encourages personal opinions in articles.

Checklist
a)Does the article propose a theory?

If so, in which section?

Are there other theories proposed?

Does the article state the theory clearly?

If not please summarize the putative theory. If there is more than one theory please detail specifically what theory is proposed, where,whether you believe the theory or theories are clearly stated and what, concisely, that theory is.

b) Do you believe the theory proposes Personal inventions. If you or a friend invented the word frindle, a drinking game, or a new type of dance move, it is not notable enough to be an article until multiple, independent, and reliable secondary sources report on it. Wikipedia is not for things made up one day.

c)Do you believe the article is or is "like" a personal essay?

Do you accept the criteria in the existing Wikipedia article ie,

Personal essays that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinion of experts).

Does the article cite expert opinion?

How many expert opinions?

Are they cited?

Are the citations proper, partial or incorrect?

Ate the citations deadlinks??

Do the citations support the contentions they are linked to?

If yo contend that the article states particular feelings of the writer, please specify which section and which statements you believe constitute "feelilngs"/