User talk:Threedeezeens

Welcome!

Hello, Threedeezeens! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Cabayi (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC) Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

The sexual politics of meat

Your article makes no effort to show the notability of the book. It's abundantly clear that the author finds it notable but we need reliable, verifiable, independent sources to show the book's notability. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

I should also point out that you're writing an encyclopedia article, not a term-paper. I'd expect it to start something like

The Sexual Politics of Meat is a 1990 book by Carol J. Adams about...

If you go to Special:Preferences and, under Gadgets, turn on ProveIt, you'll get access to a tool which will help you properly form your references from a web link or ISBN number. Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for adding some more sources. However - ecolitbooks.com is a blog, which is not a reliable source, and bloomsbury.com is the book's publisher which is not an independent source. Cabayi (talk) 21:07, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Help

Hey can someone {{helpme}} edit this page? I'm new to Wiki-editing and it still doesn't quite make sense to me - PLZ keep this page up because its for my midterm. Threedeezeens (talk) 21:15, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Nobody has suggested deleting the page but it still needs improvement. On the technical side you seem to be doing fine. Picking a subject and then finding there are insufficient sources to support the article is a common problem for Wiki Edu contributors. The article is sufficiently robust that it's unlikely to be subject to a speedy deletion. That means you'll have at least a week's advance notice of any deletion proposal. Pleading that it's for your midterm won't make a difference, the community is concerned with building an encyclopedia, not running a school.

I have however nominated the image of the book's cover for deletion as a copyright violation. WikiCommons will only accept images which are free of any copyright restrictions. Once it's been deleted there (not before, or with a different title if you really can't wait) you should load it on this wiki (not commons) with a claim of "fair use" (see WP:FURE). Hope that helps, Cabayi (talk) 21:36, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Sexual Politics of Meat (March 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Legacypac was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Sexual Politics of Meat and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:The Sexual Politics of Meat, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Legacypac (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Threedeezeens! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Legacypac (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Notes on book

Hi - I received a notification that your article was moved to the draftspace. I have some notes for you:

• Wikipedia almost never lists out a book's chapters. The only time they do that is when the chapters are of some particular importance - in other words, the chapters have a lot of coverage that focuses on them specifically. Instead of listing out the chapters, you should instead write a summary of the book itself. You could separate the summary into the different major sections, if you like, but there's no need to go chapter by chapter. It should be a very general overview that touches on the very major highlights.

• Some of the lead could be moved into a section that goes over the development of the book itself - the lead should generally be on the shorter side unless the article itself is particularly long.

• With sourcing, make sure that your sourcing is independent and reliable. Notability is not inherited by the author being a notable person - what you need to show is where other people, unaffiliated with Adams, have written about the book in academic texts, journal articles, newspapers, or the like. The best place for this sourcing is going to be your school's databases, since a lot of the coverage is most likely going to be in the academic and scholarly spheres. What you want are things like this. You can use primary sources to back up basic details, but they can't show notability.

• Avoid original research, which is research and conclusions you come up with that aren't explicitly stated in your sources. The section you have on "The Absent Referent" is an example of original research for a few reasons. The first is that you highlighted it above other things that may be mentioned in the book. Someone could argue that other points in the book are of greater or equal importance and should be highlighted before this one, as this was chosen due to your own preference and giving the term its own section gives it undue weight above others. (It's not that I don't think that it isn't worth highlighting, just that these are common arguments with articles.) The second is that you follow the definition of this term with this:

Carol J. Adams argues that women and animals are connected by this principal - a tool used by the Patriarchy to maintain control over it's subjects. By this definition, Veganism like Feminism is a movement that directly opposes the violent nature of Male-domination. Creating a silence around the oppression of marginalized beings and turning them into objects helps to render the practice normal.

This is unsourced, so it would be seen as original research. It's not that it's necessarily wrong, just that you need to make sure that you source it so that incoming people know that it isn't your own interpretation on this book and term. Basically, what you need here is just more sourcing so that it's clear that it's not original research and that these are claims and arguments Adams explicitly makes in the book - or ones made by authorities who are writing about the work in reliable sources.

Offhand this really is an interesting book - I've not read it, but I'm familiar with the ideas in it and it's surprising that this book didn't already have an article. I don't think that you'll have much trouble finding sourcing, offhand. This was a very good choice for an article topic - let me know if you need/want any help! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Sexual Politics of Meat has been accepted

The Sexual Politics of Meat, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Cabayi (talk) 10:21, 27 September 2018 (UTC)