Wikipedia:Requests for feedback

"WP:FEED" redirects here. For the essay on vandalism, see Wikipedia:Deny recognition. For RSS and Atom feeds, see Wikipedia:Syndication. For the page rating system, see Wikipedia:Article Feedback Tool.

Requests for Feedback

This page provides comments and constructive criticism about articles that you have drafted, created, or substantially changed. This is not a general help page. To seek assistance or ask a question, see Wikipedia:Questions. If you are seeking an outside opinion about a dispute, please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Please note that this page is patrolled by volunteer editors just like you and it may take several days to review your request.

Before you request feedback

There are certain things which come up again and again so it may help if you deal with them before requesting feedback: Does your article have reliable sources? These are important in terms of both verifiability and notability. Do you have a conflict of interest that may harm your ability to produce a neutral article? If you would like a beginner's guide to these sorts of issues, take a look at the article wizard. If you are unsure about how to edit Wikipedia articles, take a look at this tutorial. For a more general discussion of writing your first article, see "Your first article".

How to post a request

Place a Wikilink, with the title of the page inside [[ and ]] - for example, [[User:Example/Lipsum]] or [[Cats]] - in the box below. Click Click To Add Request In the new article, Write a brief summary of your work or what in particular you need help with, but do not post the whole article here. If you have rewritten an existing article, you may wish to provide a diff link from that article's history that shows your changes. Check regularly for responses to your request; they will most often be made here. ↓ Post your request using the box below. Replace "Untitled" with a wikilink to your article - e.g. [[User:Example/Lipsum]] or [[Cats]] ↓

After Receiving Feedback

Check back here often, as you will receive a response here. Respond to the feedback, either with a simple thank you, to ask for help with anything mentioned, or, after you've made some of the improvements, what they think of them. Consider helping out here in the future - anyone can read up on what articles should be like and provide constructive criticism.

Are you providing feedback?

Please consider notifying the user whose article you are providing feedback for by placing a message on their talk page, so they will be able to read it in a timely manner and reply if necessary. You can use.. {{Feedbackreply-sm}} A template asking the user to check back here and consider responding {{Feedbackreply-alt}} A more personal version of the first offering your help with developing, moving to mainspace, etc.

(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

The previous few days of requests are transcluded below. The pages for the past 20 days are: ()

• October 12
• October 13
• October 14
• October 15
• October 16
• October 17
• October 18
• October 19
• October 20
• October 21
• October 22
• October 23
• October 24
• October 25
• October 26
• October 27
• October 28
• October 29
• October 30
• October 31

Index of all requests for feedback

Sheree Silver

Hi, Sheree Silver is a relatively new article brought back in a deletion review. Could somebody take a look at it and see where it is on the article class scale? Thank you for your time. Spring12 (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for the short delay in responding; things can get a bit backed up here. Please help out if you can!

Re. Sheree Silver - it needs some work; I'll do a bit of editing to it now and report back soon. --  Chzz  ►  21:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

One of the main problems with the article was that the references had little information; I've corrected that with this edit.

I used various citation tools to do this - Zotero for the web links, and the cite book generator for the book. For the TV and radio episode, I just copied from template:cite_episode.

Please note that I haven't actually checked the validity of these references though, and some of them appear to be primary sources and therefore require further improvement.

I will edit it further. --  Chzz  ►  22:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your assistance! There's a slight disagreement between another editor and I over including a large number of references. (Basically, the difference between the current revision and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sheree_Silver&oldid=279938835 and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sheree_Silver&oldid=278772837. Do you think any of this info should be added? The disagreement's currently in Template:RFCbio_list. Spring12 (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll address this issue later; first, I'll do a bit more editing in the hope of answering your initial Q - i.e. the article class. Incidentally, I put all that info (re cite) about how I did things, as I always try to do in here, in the hope of giving you tips for the future. I hope it will be useful? --  Chzz  ►  22:31, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Most definitely useful, I was planning on writing everything up in MLA format by hand. :-) Spring12 (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Changed the infobox from 'philosopher' to the more standard, and I hope more appropriate, Template:Infobox Person. Please see that doc and see if further fields could be completed; if her day of birth can be added it will factor her age; Also I put all prev info into 'occupation' and some could be re-jigged into other fields perhaps. --  Chzz  ►  22:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

To answer your original request - we've promoted the article to start class; I don't feel that it meets C-class as yet due to the questionable nature of some sources (see WP:ASSESS). Per WP:V, unfortunately some of the info may need to be removed to improve it further; sadly if reliable sources don't exist, facts have to go.

Regarding your 'supplementary question';

• When discussing different versions, it's very helpful to provide a diff
• I don't think the nuforc reference is directly relevant to the topic of this article (if you see what I mean).
• I don't think eonline is a reliable source, so I'd leave that bit out. See WP:SOURCES

OK - I won't get embroiled in the debate itself, but I wish you the best of luck with it. I want to move on through this backlog. Again - if you found this useful, do have a look down the list and see if you can comment or advise any others. Cheers! --  Chzz  ►  00:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again, Spring12 (talk) 01:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Requesting feedback on proposed TurnKey Linux article

The User:Abd/TurnKey Linux was rewritten based on an earlier article that was deleted in a rather messy affair triggered by an anonymous IP vandal.

The current version of the article has been substantially rewritten and cites multiple reliable sources which establish it's notability. It is now awaiting additional feedback in order to reach a broad consensus on it's move from userspace back to mainspace.

I've opened an RfC but that seems to be a venue that focuses on edit conflicts, rather than a good place to asking for general feedback. I wasn't previously aware of this page, but now that I've found it, it looks like what I was originally looking for.

LirazSiri (talk) 02:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Move it to mainspace immediately; it's well-written and well cited. Be WP:BOLD - it may well attract comments etc, but that's all a part of the process. I see no major issues with your userspace version; it looks pretty good to me. If you have any problems, give me a shout. Good luck! --  Chzz  ►  00:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Keown100/Sion_Record_Bostick

This is my first original article and only my second contribution. Although I've tried to do my due diligence, I would appreciate any feedback.

I'm particularly interested in feedback and advice regarding citing references. I want to use inline citations as opposed to general citations. However, one reference serves as the source for several facts in the article. Is there a more appropriate way of doing this than the method I have employed?

Keown100 (talk) 09:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Regarding references;

• Some of the references use {{cite}} tags, and some don't. It would be preferable to use cite tags for all of them. As an example, I've changed one with this edit.
• The use of a named reference looks fine. I'd suggest using a shorter name, as <ref name="Muster Rolls of the Texas Revolution" /> is very long, and the name only shows up when editing. I'd use something like <ref name="Muster" />.
• The references could also be improved by adding more information. Check the template documentation, such as Template:cite news/doc, and see if you can add extra fields.
• Please also see User:Chzz/refs, especially the mention of tools, for more help with referencing.

General suggestions for improving the article;

• Dates should be in the form 1 January 1999 - no punctuation, and day month year.
• Some of the wikilinks are redirects - for example, Texas Army is a redirect to Texian Army. You should either use the latter wording, or you could put [[Texas army|Texian Army]]. (Note that the 'a' in army should not be capitalised)
• In the body text and the caption, it says; "Surrender of Santa Anna". This should be in italics and not quotes, Surrender of Santa Anna.
• Would it be possible to find a picture of the man himself?
• Some of the sections are too short to stand on their own (such as 'personal life' - this should be merged into other areas of the article
• One of the best ways to improve the article would be to find books that give more information. This would also improve the references.
• One last tip - have a look at similar articles in the featured articles and good articles categories. These are exemplary Wikipedia articles, and are great for seeing the 'right way' to do things.

I hope this helps; good luck with it.  Chzz  ►  03:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Extremely useful advice across the board. I'll refine the article in each of the mentioned areas. Many thanks for taking the time to provide such insightful feedback. Keown100 (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Cham Albanians

I have remade this article, and for sure it is not any more start-class. Can somebody review it?Balkanian`s word (talk) 11:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I note that the article is being peer reviewed here, and is also a Good article nomination. It would seem that several editors are hard at work on it. Therefore, to avoid any issues of WP:SHOPPING, I think that further help here wouldn't be appropriate. Good lukk with the GA; of course, if you do have any specific need of help, please ask. --  Chzz  ►  04:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org:80/wiki/User:Perelien/Sandbox

Hi! I'm a new user, and a first-time contributor. I've just written an article on Dutch trance artist DJ Dazzle (it's in my Sandbox), and I would really appreciate it if someone could have a look at it and give me some feedback. Thanks a lot in advance! Perelien (talk) 17:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I suggest adding more reliable sources for verifiability, and remember to be careful with words like keen or instantly hooked, because they can sometimes be exaggerations. The citation style is a little bit unclear (enclosing the references in hyperlinks isn't necessary), but this should be ready for a mainspace move sometime soon. Spring12 (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Spring12, thank you very much for your feedback and tips! I've edited the expressions you pointed out. I've also tried a different approach with regards to references, would you please have another look? Adding more references is quite difficult, though, as there aren't too many available. The only more recent bio I could find online is at the artist's MySpace page - can I list that one? I will keep working on it, though! I also have a question concerning images: I've received a few pictures in a promo pack, from the artist's manager. May I use them here? Thanks in advance! Perelien (talk) 12:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Article: Situationist International - from Start to C-Class

I would say Situationist International has now evolved to C-Class. Any comments?--Sum (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh my. The references are a real mess at the moment, and in dire need of a thorough going-over. You might get some ideas from user:chzz/refs. Reliable, verifiable references are vital to an article - a good way to think of it is, if you were reading the article, and looked at all the books, weblinks etc, would you be able to check up every single fact? --  Chzz  ►  05:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, but using templates for citations is not a requirement for C-Class.--Sum (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

First article - Feedback is appreciated

Hello everybody,

I wrote a first article for Wikipedia and would appreciate your feedback. My main interest is the US economy and its companies, so I opted to write an article on a US company who’s products are very well known (Westcott scissors and rulers) but the company itself is less known: Acme United Corporation.

Since I’m not allowed to upload images yet, I could also use someone’s help to upload three images for the article (the company’s logo and two of its products).

Many thanks in advance for your advice and assistance. Caea (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hm... a few things are uncited, but the sources you have listed look pretty reliable. As far as images go, you first want to try locating those that are licensed for free use. If none are available, you can try uploading them to the article under a free use rationale, if it applies. Spring12 (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, you might want to put an access date on those links. Spring12 (talk) 21:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Spring12, many thanks for your feedback. I appreciate it very much. Concerning the images, they are for free use, but when I wanted to upload them, I couldn’t because I haven’t edited enough articles yet. Can I get any help with that? Caea8937 (talk) 20:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure, where are the images located? Spring12 (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

The three images are on my hard drive, so I can e-mail or upload them. Caea8937 (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

If the upload form is working now, that's the best bet. You have a couple options. The easiest route for "free" images is through [1]. The instructions are pretty straight forward, but if you have any more questions let me know. Spring12 (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

User:AirCombat/VANDU

Hey there. I've been working in the area of harm reduction in Canada, and I recently met some of the members of VANDU. I figured they needed an article, as they are showing up more and more in recent media. I've read the VANDU website and was thinking of using some of the article links they provide to garner more sources; all feedback is appreciated! AC (talk) 17:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

You can start with their site's "sources", yes, but try to find as many reliable sources as possible from third parties. They might not meet the general notability guidelines right now, until more RS are present. Spring12 (talk) 19:22, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I just have another small question -- can I use Google News / Scholar results as reliable sources? I remember in university we had accounts on various "sourcing" sites that you paid for in order to get reliable, checked results, and I'm wondering if Scholar is as good. AC (talk) 17:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, news stories and Google Scholar articles are very reliable--because the publications go through fact checking and stuff. Those are actually some of the best sources to cite. Killiondude (talk) 17:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Margaret Bryan

I have rewritten the article on Margaret Bryan adding information and references. I have also rearranged a lot of the information that was already there, and deleted some. I think this is the comparison link: [2] I'm a newbie to extensive editing on Wikipedia and this was a project to help me teach myself how to code. I would greatly appreciate it if an experienced editor could take a look at what I've done. It would be good to have any feedback you can give me on coding, practice and/or content. Many thanks.
--JohnTheSupercargo (talk) 09:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm sure there are more experienced editors than I am, but I'd be glad to try. :-) The current revision you have looks okay, but a lot of the wording is unnecessary (such as: was appointed Lady Governess to all the legitimate children; which would be more encyclopedic as "was Lady Governess for"). Usually articles should keep a neutral tone, not too much, not to little. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid, it gives a little bit of advice in this manner. For the links to external websites, I've been going with this template: <ref>{{Cite web | title = | accessdate = | url = </ref> Spring12 (talk) 03:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It is a bit wordy, I agree. I found re-writing a very wordy and confused earlier version, trying to include valuable points that others had posted, and coding properly difficult to combine. Maybe it gets easier? :-) I'll print out a version of the text alone and look at it on paper. Usually helps me. I'll look through the Words to avoid page too. The pattern for the ref is useful. I confess, I just copied the one decent one that was already on the page and reused it, except for the refs to British History Online which follow the pattern given on that site. Thanks again.
--JohnTheSupercargo (talk) 08:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Have re-written my re-write. Hope the quality of the language is better now. I have removed the "improveref" notification on the article. Would appreciate feedback.
--JohnTheSupercargo (talk) 06:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

New article: Harwich Junior Theatre

I noticed there was no article about the Harwich Junior Theatre, so I figured I'd write one.

• 1. sufficiently notable? (50+ years old plus culturably notable in its area).
• 2. editing suggestions?

Thanks! Rmd1023 (talk) 16:46, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome! Unfortunately, the theatre might not meet Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies), because to be notable an organization has to have significant coverage in secondary sources, which is not apparent from the current revision. Also, the writing style is a little bit promotional (ex: including the verbatim address makes it resemble an ad, being more descriptive would be better). Good luck, Spring12 (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Modbear/Sandbox - Counterstring

Hello. I recently requested an article on counterstrings (graduated strings used in software testing), but then decided to take the initiative and created this article in my user space. I'm interestred in feedback on the topic notablity, the clarity of explanation, the style and the language issues (as I'm not a native speaker). Thanks! --Modbear (talk) 21:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not good with computer science, but I showed another editor your article and they found it interesting. However, both of us agreed that the sources you used are self-published sources (blogs) which aren't really credible/acceptable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia requires multiple third-party, reliable sources to show that something is notable enough for inclusion. I tried to do some investigating to see if there were more credible sources that would prove notability, but came up short. Killiondude (talk) 00:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the term is pretty specific, so it's no wonder that there aren't any solid white papers written about it. :-) In fact, the reason I wrote this article is that I once came across this term and couldn't find its definition almost anywhere, including Wikipedia (which has an extensive computer science knowledge base).

As for WP:SPS, I've noticed that it makes an exception for self-published sources "produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." Out of the three sources I provided, the earliest and initial one, [3], is James Bach's blog. He is indeed an expert in software testing (whish is the field the term relates to), the author of many published works on testing (see [4], [5]) and co-author of Cem Kaner (you can find both them under Software_testing#References). Given this, can this source be accepted? --Modbear (talk) 17:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I had wondered if any of the blog authors would be considered "experts in their fields". Even if James Bach would be considered an "expert" and therefore citing his blog is allowed (which, I'm leaning towards agreeing with), it still doesn't fulfill WP:N. There needs to be "significant coverage" to warrant an article, and one blog about it doesn't really fulfill that... I don't make the rules, I just follow them :-) Actually, it was community consensus that formed that rule many years ago. Killiondude (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I see. --Modbear (talk) 13:01, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

S. Omar Barker

I believe the S. was for Samuel. He signed notes to friends with a "lazy S" O. B. He often said he tried to register the brand "lazy S"OB but some other lazy s.o.b. already had. I met S. Omar Barker and his wife Elsa when he asked my father to translate a letter to Elsa Barker that was in Dutch. As the rest of our family was away I accompanied my father to the Barkers' house. Later I was in Elsa Barker's 7th grade English class/homeroom. One of the delights of Mrs. Barker's English class was the occasional lecture from S. Omar Barker. He would always talk about the work of writing. He would end his talk with the reminder that "writing is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration." S. Omar Barker grew up in Bullah, New Mexico. The Sapello, New Mexico, Postmistress says Bullah is more a general area. The zip code for Sapello will also bring up Bullah on some web sites. S. Omar Barker's older brother was the forrest ranger who found the burned bear cub known to one and all as Smokey Bear to this day.

97.119.132.123 (talk)Katherine H. Kirk (aka Katie Mallory) Sapello, New Mexico —Preceding undated comment added 23:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC).

I'm not sure what that was. But this is not the place for it. Thanks. Killiondude (talk) 06:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The links between internal belief systems and academics

INTERNAL BELIEF SYSTEMS Article

INTERNAL BELIEF SYSTEMS By Kirtis Tomas, with recommended revisions by Steven Carl Johnson In the past 50 years, African-Americans have been labeled olored egro lack and frican American Few cultures in modern history have experienced such fluidity in defining whom they are, as determined by skin color and racial origins. The name game is just a symptom of a more pernicious problem, which correlates with fairly consistent low academic test scores in the African-American community. The difficulty in accurately defining this race and concomitant poor learning skills are demonstrably attributed to the lack of internalized belief systems (IBS). What passes for thinking may be relegated to comparing and contrasting processes. One thing is measured by its relativity to another. All too often, there is a noticeable lack of definitive criteria by which to relate to one environment in a meaningful way. In order to be able to analyze data, one must have an innate belief system with which to compare and contrast information, thereby rendering meaning. Furthermore, it is difficult to utilize the internal beliefs of others when one has no personal belief system or common cultural set of beliefs, because one must believe in something to accept or reject an external belief system. Here, to ccept means to acknowledge, not condone in agreement. For the purpose of this discussion, elief system may be defined as shared history of mostly unconscious, yet functional, self-knowledge. In other words, it is a personal set of values that may be handed down from one generation to another or learned via a communal setting that can be applied to interpretation and thus accept or reject a particular fact, idea, or position. Validation of these concepts is then internal instead of external. It is by way of internal validation that a society comes to many widely accepted group norms, including its own identity, or name. The identifying label might not stem from the group own choosing, but rather, from the group acceptance or acknowledgment of an external belief system. Explained simply, you are what you believe. For people to have core beliefs, they must have a pre-existing template, one that allows people to analyze data, with the template serving as the philosophical platform. For example, Korean people believe their race sprang from the union of a woman with a bear. Jews believe they are God chosen people. Whether these beliefs are accurate is irrelevant to this discussion. What matters is that a majority of that culture believes it. And from these basic beliefs, along with religion and history, springs the (IBS) from which people move forward and experience life. Their impact on daily behavior, cognition, emotional functions, etc., can be seen most clearly in the way an (IBS) promotes stereotypes, when in fact what is being experienced by others is a gross reflection of the (IBS). All groups, from Asians and Jews to Arabs and Hispanics, seem to fit part of stereotypes, at least the positive ones, if not the negative. (SMART, TOUGH, LAZY, etc.) Yet for the most part, fortunately or unfortunately, the shared (IBS) determines who we really are. We are not independent human beings of historical literature; we are more alike than different in our common culturally delineated humanities. There may be an argument about what makes a qualified, belief system: there is room for interpretation; still, at a minimum, the definition of an (IBS) should answer the following questions: 1. Where did I come from? 2. What am I doing? 3. Where am I going? 4. How do I get from here to there? One of the other potent functions of the (IBS) is that it combines three things: culture, history, and template (which serve as a catalyst) upon which a culture forms, and individual identities, which are really group identities, function. Most people identify themselves as belonging to a particular nation, race, and ethnic background, and sharing history and origins with those of the same identity. Loyalty to one people group, cultural traditions, and religious values form the framework within which each of us exists. American Blacks do not have collective beliefs as compared to virtually all other recognizable cultures. During slavery, African-Americans were the victims of historic brainwashing. Today African-Americans inherited this brainwashing from their slave ancestors. Who, being the last people held in slavery in large numbers, were the benefactors of a well-developed system that strove to erase the remains of a once-held belief system. There were, in slavery, numerous African tribes and, as such, numerous belief systems. [different cultures = different belief systems] In approximately 270 years, all of the significant ingredients of an (IBS) were removed, from religion to philosophy, language to folk tales, as if erased from a chalkboard. In modern terms, it could be thought of a as brainwashing through which no memory of what made up the culture was left. Ergo, no transmittable (IBS) survived. This theory is based on research and observations of African American students at Michigan State University (1966 1971). Most of the African-American students scored, on average, 20 points lower on the Graduate Record Exam than white students, why such a disparity? Over time, people without belief systems are more inclined to engage in less cognitive behaviors that don require the utilization of the strengths inherent in a belief system (such as deductive reasoning). Some of these less cognitive behaviors and activities are: spending significant time watching television, being more sensitive to popular culture phenomena (as expressed in such valueless behaviors as promiscuous sexual activity), and or pride in ones ability to engage in rudimentary language skills. After undergraduate college, many of these same African-American students went to law school. Following graduation from law school, many of them were better-spoken, able to articulate thoughts, debate theories, and discuss complex issues. Before law school training they could not do that. Based upon these observations, the hypothesis is that these African-American students had found something that helped serve as a philosophical platform from which they were able to engage in positive cognitive interaction. What was this platform? It was, in fact, the law. The American legal system is a set of rules that govern society, a set of rules that gave these African-Americans something they had been missing, namely, a functional belief system that was both ordered and organized. This belief system facilitated these students ability to climb the intellectual ladder and learn how to think critically and reflectively. As stated earlier what passes for thinking is really comparing and contrasting ideas. In order to be able to analyze data, one must have a reliable, fixed belief system with which, or from which, to compare and contrast the information. Even concepts such as religious faith had a European perspective, since all that had been African was denied both by slave status and 300 years of distancing from what African religions might have been. Without an (IBS) logic dictates that one does not truly believe in anything. Having nothing to compare with, one cannot accept anything as fact. Thus, such ystem-less individuals experience inconsistent boundaries or values by which to evaluate everyday occurrences. Obviously, the advantage of an (IBS) is the facilitation of data. One can make sense of the world only when external events can be processed, or compared. The disadvantage is less obvious, being that it is nearly impossible for people to break away from a given, ingrained way of thinking. In groups, this is a down side in the sense that they will all tend to think alike and act alike, and feel comfortable while doing the same. This includes all the inherent historically obtained behavioral/cognitive errors, since no belief system is developed perfectly or without errors. A common saying dictates that people who do not know their history are doomed to repeat the mistakes of that history. This is a fallacy. Groups with (IBS) often know their history well, and continue the mistake cycle. They will repeat errors because the errors are by-products of their immutable template. This leads to an cho effect of sorts, being defined as the unconscious whisper of the original mistake (error) heard in one mind, like echo. Some cultures excel in certain areas as a result of following the template; in other areas, mistakes are readily repeated, not only by themselves, but by later generations as well. Mistakes as well as successes can be duplicated, just like any other identifiable feature of a given belief system. In order to understand and appreciate the strengths of an (IBS), one might read the Willie Lynch Letter of 1712 (see Appendix). This reading may provide the necessary background as to what brainwashing is, when used on a cultural social basis if understood correctly; the rainwashing which is discussed here is outstandingly different from that debated in the 1970 . Supposedly, Vietnamese intelligence experts were brainwashing individual prisoners of war. There was quite a bit of controversy amongst psychologists as to whether such a measure could actually be effective. That set aside, the brainwashing referred here is a social program, perpetrated and felt broadly across the culture. Its main focus was not that individuals were subjected to intense indoctrination (though in a few cases a slave may have equired some such in the slave owners minds). The main thrust was to develop and maintain the economy as one that used the agricultural ools available to the farmer: horses, livestock, equipment, and sadly slaves. This is clearly seen in the Lynch document and / or its equivalent in the 1700 . In the slave-owner mentality, the desired goal was to reduce African-Americans in servitude to the mental and emotional (or psychological) level of barnyard animals for the purpose of breeding them for compliance and work. Obviously, animals have no history, culture, or language, which is why the slave-owners worked viciously to eradicate these things from the minds of their slaves. There are at least two conclusions regarding internal belief system. Initially they may seem contradictory; however in full form one may gain a complementary picture. First, there are benefits too not having a belief system (this may seem counter intuitive based on what has been written thus far). With that in mind, never the less, functioning without an IBS, or thinking outside of the box (IBS) one must be aware that they are doing so. In other words, to reap the benefits of being able to think outside of the box (outside the IBS), one must realize the following: the fact that there are boxes, they have limitations, and they have potentials. The creativity of non-box thinking is about as close to genius-thinking as most humans are capable of. Further testing is required. Second, in order to improve societal functioning of African Americans, a belief system can be taught that would not impose some of the features people find distasteful in other belief systems. This would allow African-Americans to improve their social standing and be able to compete in a society that has been run by flawed, internally corrupt belief systems. Teaching law (American Jurisprudence) starting in kindergarten would be beneficial to African-American students. American law is a simple enough belief system and would empower the students who learn it. In kindergarten, this belief system could be taught in simplified methods, becoming increasingly complex as the student moves into higher grades. This training would provide the students with the ability to make judgments based on comparing and contrasting data to a fixed quantity. On reaching high-school, the students would step beyond instruction in what American Law says and begin to learn about how to adjust in a society based on that Law: how to conduct oneself as a consumer of legal services, how to mount a political campaign, and how to mount a social movement or protest movement. If correct, several things should occur, grade point averages should rise, violence should decrees, and the general achievement of an entire subject group or race should be raised. If this works to satisfaction, it could become the central engine of a particular society or a significant portion of the engine. It is also possible that by being able to choose a belief system that is based more on logic, reason, and societal mores, we may be able to avoid the pitfalls inherent in other systems that cause repetitive, self-destructing patterns. [THIS EDUCATIONAL PLAN PRESENTED BY THE 1830 CORPORATION] Works Cited BAOSU Members. (2005). Belief system: a double-edge sword. Oklahoma State University Buddhist Association. Retrieved November 26, 2006 from http://www.okstate.edu/osu_orgs/ba/F05/belief_system.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mantraack (talk • contribs) 20:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Please see WP:Your first article and WP:Intro. What you wrote doesn't really belong on this page, as this page is for feedback on articles, not a place to post articles. What you posted doesn't really seem encyclopedic. Perhaps you can read more about what Wikipedia is and is not. Killiondude (talk) 00:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Jimpeoples/Example/John_p_Healey

This is my first article for Wikipedia. I am slowly working my way through this process and am still about halfway lost most of the time. I would appreciate feedback on the article and guidance about what the next steps are when it is "ready for prime time." Thx, Jimpeoples (talk) 20:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I will bring this to your talk page, since you had it deleted per U1. Killiondude (talk) 06:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Nm. I see it was moved to John P. Healey. You've done a pretty good job for your first article. I think you might need to focus on making it more neutral in tone, and not trying to praise him or his work. Just give the facts and no superfluous language :-) You might wanna check out WP:AVOID and WP:PEACOCK (I think you have some words from the second link that are in this article). Also, one of the references links to a Geocities webpage which is not considered a reliable source since it has no fact checking reputation. Also, you might wanna use our {{cite web}} and other {{cite}} templates to make the references look better. There are a lot of pictures in the article, which isn't necessarily bad, but not all of them relate to Healey directly. Perhaps cutting out a few of the indirectly related pictures might help the article look more like an encyclopedia entry. Hopefully this helped. Any further questions, you can ask here or on my talk page. Killiondude (talk) 06:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for feedback on article Crazy Bones

Hello All,

I've been around on wikipedia for a while, but I've only really reverted vandalism up until now. I was looking around for information on a toy a friends child was playing with and when I got the the page Crazy Bones I was a bit disappointed. I decided I would have a crack at revising it a little bit and did just that. The thing is I don't know if I've done a good job or where to go with it next!? I'd really like to get it up to DYK status because I think a hook about Greek kids playing with sheeps knucklebones would be BRILLIANT! Your time, effort and advice is greatly appreciated! --LookingYourBest (talk) 18:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Swimlej/Fighting_Chance

I am working in this article about Fighting Chance a non-profit cancer information center in my hometown. It is my first article, and I wanted to make sure I included enough references to third party sources. Any suggests that you can give to help improve the article would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swimlej (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC) --Swimlej (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

SLIMbus

This is the first article I have written for Wikipedia. I would appreciate any feedback. Thanks, --Kdboyce (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Politics of Bristol

Hi,

I've spent today editing the Politics of Bristol article today and I think it looks a lot better for it.

I've hidden some of the information on the History of Bristol City Council page because I think the original was getting a bit crowded.