Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Why Journalists Deserve Low Pay


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Userfied per discussion at ANI. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Why Journalists Deserve Low Pay

 * – ( View AfD View log )

User-written essay. Fails WP:OR and WP:NOTBLOG amongst many other things. Zlqchn (talk) 08:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * A clear case for Delete as per nom. asnac (talk) 08:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Picard's presentation might actually pass the notability guidelines given the number of sources out there (somewhat inevitable, given the topic), in which case it deserves an article. This original essay, however, is not that article. It's irretrievable in its current form - blast it with TNT. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 09:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Userfy Per the article's main page, the article's creator "is a member of the U.S. Public Policy WikiProject." Yes, the article is an essay and doesn't belong in the main space, but I don't think deletion is the right answer here. PaintedCarpet (talk) 09:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It came from the User's userspace. See User:Catgaunt/sandbox‎.Zlqchn (talk) 10:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Then it should go back there. The article's creator is a member of this class, which is supported by both WikiPriject Wikipedia and Wikpiedia Ambassadors. I don't believe this article belongs at AfD. PaintedCarpet (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's still there. As far as I can see, the user just copied it from her usespace to mainspace today. FYI, I also nominated the Userpage for deletion because this is an original essay that has nothing to do with Wikipedia. But that's for the mfd discussion. Zlqchn (talk) 10:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ordinarily I'd agree with you. But since the creator is taking a Wikipedia-approved class on how to write Wikipedia articles, I don't feel deleting the page is the right answer. PaintedCarpet (talk) 10:59, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I had no idea what the education programme is so I had a look. From what I can read on the main Wikimedia project page, the aim of this programme is to promote Wikipedia as a teaching tool and encourage both the teachers and students to contribute to Wikipedia. The way I understand it, it does not give users permission to put original essays on Wikipedia (mainspace and userspace). They may be 'special' contributors in certain aspects, but they still have to follow Wikipedia policies. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Zlqchn (talk) 11:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's entirely possible the students were instructed to place their articles in the mainspace for the class. On the other hand, the individual authors may have done that on their own. I've contacted the class online ambassador to ask for more information. PaintedCarpet (talk) 11:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem is not that this is a badly written article that needs cleanup, wikify, etc or that it has WP:N, WP:V issues (it does, but that's not the main issue at hand). It's the fact that this is an original essay that has (very) little chance of becoming a proper article.Zlqchn (talk) 11:09, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right. This is an essay. We usually delete essays. In this case however (as well as other cases where the people taking this class have put their articles up on the mainspace) I think the authors should be encouraged. rather than immediately being their articles to AfD. PaintedCarpet (talk) 11:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've seen some of the other Afds around related to this project. And you are right, they should be encouraged, but to write proper articles, not essays. For example, as an editor suggested above, the Picard's presentation bit may be useful enough to be an article on its own. I suspect that there may be a communication problem somewhere in this mess so I will keep an eye on the project page to see what they say.Zlqchn (talk) 11:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Because there maybe be a systemic issue with the Canadian course (given these two AfDs), I have raised it at ANI. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 11:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I suspect there may be a communication error somewhere in this mess.Zlqchn (talk) 11:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing so. Thanks to Yunshui for referring it to ANI. PaintedCarpet (talk) 11:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Greetings. My name is Jonathan Obar, I'm one of the coordinators for the Canadian arm of the Education Program. Let me start by saying that I really appreciate all of your help thus far. I know that integrating new editors into the community can sometimes be a challenge. I'd like to first respond to User:Yunshui and User:Zlqchn. The Canadian initiative does not have a "systemic problem" nor is it a "mess." To expect that new editors are going to join the community without making mistakes is unrealistic. Professors who are learning about WP themselves are teaching students how this all works. Overall, I think the students are doing a great job. Yes, we need to make sure that students are returning to articles to wikify the content and to address issues raised by the community. I would hope that responses (and methods for getting students to do this) would be constructive first, before being critical, and certainly before catastrophizing. Overall, I think the Canadian students (and we do have five classes this semester) have done a pretty good job learning this new system. Let's please try to welcome with open arms instead of turning our backs. Again, thank you for all of your help. Jaobar (talk) 16:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. :)Zlqchn (talk) 16:09, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, professors should learn about what WP is and and isn't before they attempt to teach their students about it. – ukexpat (talk) 17:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Userfy - per User:PaintedCarpet. ukexpat (talk) 17:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. Possibly userfy. Folgertat (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.