Re: wikipedia draft
- Posted by ghaberek (admin) Jan 01, 2021
- 2073 views
Can you delete AngusWOOF? Just who does he think is more qualified to speak about Phix than you?
Wikipedia's own rules are stated there in the header:
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
Is Phix notable? (And for that matter, is Euphoria?) Is the information from reliable sources? It's mostly from Pete. Is Pete, as the sole author and publisher of all-things-Phix, a verifiable source for that information?
I'm not doubting Pete or Phix or the authenticity of the article in and of itself. But these are the objective questions that Wikipedia asks of all articles to ensure that the content is valid and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
-Greg
