User talk:MaddieLeJeune

Welcome!
Hello, MaddieLeJeune, 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) 14:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Data Feminism for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Data Feminism is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Data Feminism until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Train2104 (t • c) 04:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi - I was notified of this page's deletion. It looks like the main concern with deletion is that there isn't really a lot or any coverage that specifically talks about data feminism as it's a very new, emergent field of study and the name itself has only recently begun to be used. There's also a concern that this is written in the style of an essay as opposed to a Wikipedia article.
 * I have to share in these concerns, as the article does seem to be written in more of a persuasive style(IE, it's making an appeal to the reader) and also has content that comes across as original research - meaning conclusions and research that you created based on existing sourcing. For example, you tie some things and say that they are part of this field, however we technically cannot say that this is a form of data feminism specifically unless we have something from the author that specifically mentions it as such and/or an independent reliable source that discusses the topic. The independent source is especially important, as this would be necessary to show that it is important enough to be mentioned in the article. To use a more specific example, you mention Waring's film - however the sourcing you have for this looks to be mostly primary and the only independent source you have places this in feminist economics. This means that saying that it would fall within data feminism would be considered original research.
 * I'm not really sure that this article will survive the deletion discussion for these reasons. I'm very sorry about this - you may be able to make mention of this in another article, such as feminism or perhaps feminist economics, but I'm not sure that the existing literature and coverage is really there yet for this specific topic. It can sometimes take years or even a few decades for a specific field or subset to gain the necessary coverage for an article. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 12:20, 17 November 2017 (UTC)