User talk:Culturclopedia

differences
Hi, probably an encyclopedic article could be written about this journal, but the version that you restored is flawed in many ways. For some suggestions on how to write a good article on an academic journal, see our journal article writing guide. Given the current state of the article, I think it is better to maintain the redirect to the Center. If I find some time in the coming days, I'll have a go at it myself, but until a more acceptable version is created, please do not restore that flawed/promotional version. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 09:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. After another editor's critique of the article, I've been searching for criticism of the journal to add. Any help you could provide to fix this entry would be appreciated. Perhaps deleting the parts of the article that seem most opinionated would solve the problem? Culturclopedia (talk) 15:37, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Randykitty, thank you for your help. The page looks great. Culturclopedia (talk) 18:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)