User talk:Milhouse-the-mighty
Welcome!
|
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Milhouse-the-mighty, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam 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.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Peer review
[edit]The article is well done.
- The lead section provides a clear summary and expectation of what the article is about
- It has a clear structure and organization, and reads in a very logical manner.
- The tone is neutral and not biased towards any particular perspective
- The sources are extensive and reliable.
- I would suggest for the balance of the article, that the 'reception' aspect of the article could either be expanded, or deleted. If there are more reviews of the podcast, perhaps a couple quotes from critics about it, or otherwise to get rid of the section entirely (and possibly just incorporate it somewhere else in the article, maybe under 'podcast', or even in the lead).
Hothamwater (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi, your article is very detailed and you use a variety of sources. Your subsections allow for clarity and ease of understanding the material. The article does a good job of explaining the aims of the podcast from an objective viewpoint. To add more balance to your article, perhaps more sources that are critical of the podcast could be added. While you've done a good job of remaining neutral on the subject and have used good sources, they all seem to lean toward the podcast with positivity. Other than that, great job.--Harkiret (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
The article Intercepted with Jeremy Scahill has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- A four-month-old political podcast. Article reads like advertising, which is fitting because that's where much of what passes for sourcing is from the producer.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calton | Talk 05:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Intercepted with Jeremy Scahill for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Intercepted with Jeremy Scahill 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intercepted with Jeremy Scahill 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. Calton | Talk 04:28, 22 April 2017 (UTC)