User talk:Davesbaker

Welcome!
Hello, Davesbaker, 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. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Sandbox topic
Hi! I saw that on your sandbox you have the title "Torpedoing Normalization: The Financial Disincentives for Foreign Priority Filings in First World Countries under the Paris Convention and Madrid Protocol". This sounds like it's the subject of a journal article or term paper - keep in mind that this sort of writing doesn't fit into Wikipedia's writing style for articles. (Although if it's the title of an existing article that is very notable then that's different and should be handled similarly to how book articles are composed.)

For example, we could create an article that details free trade in a specific country, such as "Free trade in Australia" that covers the country's free trade agreements, the history of fair trade in the country (which could include the impact of specific events and legal matters on free trade), and the impact the specific country has had on free trade. However an article that discusses the impact of X event on free trade in Australia will almost certainly be too specific unless there are a lot of independent, reliable sources that cover this specific topic as we can only summarize what has been explicitly stated in the sources - we cannot draw conclusions or create ties unless it's already been written/discussed in a reliable source. For it to have its own article there would need to be many sources that specifically cover that topic as opposed to mentioning it in passing in relation to the general topic of free trade in Australia. I hope that makes sense - Wikipedia can be a little odd to get used to with how it covers topics.

The article should also not contain a literature review, as this in itself is something that would be considered original research - not only because it would be 1-2 specific people reflecting on the literature but also because it would be picking out specific literature over others to highlight. By its very nature a literature review would be considered original research.

Let me know if you have any questions. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)