User talk:Houston5December

Welcome to Wikipedia!
- Welcome-

Waun Ki Hong
In response to your email (and please reply here), firstly, my cut and paste comment was about my own mistake in having to move the page twice. User:Houston5December/sandbox is in no way ready to be an article, it is overly promotional and biased, and contains no independent 3rd party references. Please see WP:NEUTRAL and WP:REFERENCE-- Jac 16888 Talk 17:42, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. Would it help if I removed the list of awards? Dr. Hong's accomplishments and seminal research are well documented and they are impressive. Do you have suggestions about how to tone it down without losing essence of the importance of his research contributions? Houston5December 18:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The "Research" section I would consider to be the biggest issue, not the awards. The entire article is written like a press release about the guy, this is an encyclopedia - i.e. cold hard facts, no matter how important he is-- Jac 16888 Talk 19:26, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I edited the research section and added references. I requested a move to rename the page Waun Ki Hong. Is it possible to delete from public view the editor's previous comments about the article needing references, etc. as these issues have been addressed?Houston5December 19:27, 19 May 2014
 * I'm sorry but I have moved the page back again, it is still not even close to a suitable article. You have not fixed anything at all with the bias tone of the article (phrases such as "A national and international leader in medical oncology", "He was the main architect for the landmark..." and "a new paradigm for cancer..." are just not encyclopedic). In addition you have not actually added any useful references, i.e. those from a neutral 3rd party, links to articles written by the subject don't help anyone. I found a couple of example articles, take a look at David Gorski or Jac 16888  Talk 19:46, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure why these are considered biased statements? He really was the main architect...it really did create a new paradigm for cancer treatment...upon which others have based their work. I used the approved article for Dr. John Mendelsohn's page as an example of what had been accepted, just so you know the context and where I got my format regarding acceptable references. I will take your suggestions into consideration and keep working on it...Houston5December 19:55, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Have a read of WP:PEACOCK, along with the pages I already suggested above-- Jac 16888 Talk 19:56, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

I made additional changes and added third-party articles about Dr. Hong from New York Times and Time Magazine. Could you check the latest edit and tell me if I am making progress in a favorable direction? Can the article be moved to published article status as is for the time being? Many thanks. Houston5December 21:31, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a step in the right direction, although take a look at WP:LAYOUT as well. I would still say it is not ready to be published, I would suggest you submit it through the WP:AFC system so more expert article writers can review it-- Jac 16888 Talk 21:37, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

I have a couple of ideas to improve the article text in the research section before I submit it through the WP:AFC system. Will I need to retype the article as a new article to submit it through the system, or is there a way I can just move it when I'm ready to submit it throught the system?Houston5December 18:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You can move it, see WP:MOVE-- Jac 16888 Talk 19:01, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

So it is essentially the same as when I moved it before and gave it the title of Waun Ki Hong? I don't see anything that directs me specifically anywhere, other than the "move" instructions that I did before.Houston5December 19:40, 21 May 2014 (UTC)