User talk:MiShe11e38

Proposed deletion of "Online Collaboration Tools in Elementary Education"
The deletion of an article you created, Online Collaboration Tools in Elementary Education, has been proposed for the following reason:


 * Essay.

You are welcome to improve the article to meet Wikipedia's quality standards and remove the deletion notice from the article. You may also remove the notice if you disagree with the deletion, though in such cases, further discussion may take place at Articles for deletion, and the article may still be deleted if there is a consensus to do so.

Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy. You may wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 02:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Online Collaboration Tools in Elementary Education
An article that you have been involved in editing, Online Collaboration Tools in Elementary Education, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Online Collaboration Tools in Elementary Education. Thank you.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 04:28, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Online Collaboration Tools in Elementary Education
Hi. I am happy to answer your questions and address any concerns you have. Would you prefer to discuss the issues I you raised on my talk page? Here? Or on the deletion discussion page? Let me know. I will watch all of those locations. If you are new to Wikipedia welcome. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

See your talk page. I've asked questions there. My concerns are lack of constructive feedback. Your critique doesn't give me anything to work with, and appears subjective and trivial. I am new to Wikipedia, and obviously am in a learning curve. From your site, it appears you are not that far ahead of me on the learning curve, and thus makes your critiques of my submissions even less valid in my eyes. MiShe11e38 (talk) 01:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay. Well I'm sorry that your initial experience here is dealing with your article being put up for deletion. I know that's a stressful experience, and people's comments can seem harsh.
 * 1)I would recommend copying that article's formatted text (from the it's "edit" page) onto your computer so you have a copy of what you created.
 * 2)Understand that people here are volunteers and they're giving their opinions after taking the time to read your article.
 * 3)If you want help or want suggestions there are many people here who are willing to offer guidance.
 * 4)In my opinion and that of other editors here there are several problems with the article you created, but if you're willing to address them and are interested in contributing to articles that are suitable for Wikipedia, I'd be happy to offer my help and suggestions. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

My issues are not with the time you put into volunteering here, in fact I appreciate that. My issues have to do with your style of criticism. If you look at the other discussion contributors, you'll see that I haven't addressed their complaints, because I understood their positive, concise and constructive feedback. In fact, I agree with what they've said. Maybe it should be combined with the other entries. It was a synthesis. It was written by a group of IT PhD students, three of whom are International Students from Korea and Taiwan with very limited English. However, that is besides the point. I'm working on the suggestions they've given. You, however, did not provide suggestions. You simply provided negative wording such as "poorly written" and "shocked at." I've asked you questions on your talk page, as noted above, which you still have not answered. What does poorly written mean? Simply that it is not typical of encyclopedia formatting? Does it contain grammatical errors? Why are you shocked? At the topic's inclusion as a separate article? If you'd pose your critical analysis in a manner that was supportive, positive and constructive, I'd value your opinions much more. In fact, a presentation in that style would elicit much less emotion and not make the overall process "stressful." MiShe11e38 (talk) 01:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Mishelle, I've put a few of my thoughts on my talk page where you posted a comment. I am happy to discuss my concerns wherever you'd like, but I think one location would be best.


 * Please don't take my comments on the article for deletion page personally. That area is not a discussion page about how to improve the article, it's a discussion of whether the article should be deleted or not. If you look on that page you will see there are many many many articles proposed for deletion.  It takes a lot of time to read all those articles and comment on them.  So I put up a few very short comments on my reasoning. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I posted a new comment on my discussion page. I also have some other ideas depending on your thoughts. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi there. I added some new comments to my talk page. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)