Wikipedia talk:School and university projects/Ocean Animals

Notes from your Classmates

General Questions

Can we include the Howler Monkey? - Jane

Source Questions

Can we cite the A-Wing Slash article?

Editing Suggestions Did you misspell the word cite in the opening paragraph? - Joe No I didnt.. -Heather

Other Suggestions

Speedy Deletion

I returned the speedy deletion template, which was removed by the creator of this article with no reason given. To the creator: if you wish to have the template removed please discuss it here on the talk page. --Canderson7 18:50, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

This page is a school project, however, the students are researching all that they report, and are citing sources as any good scholar should do. I do not see why this would make the page a candidate for deletion. We are trying to add to the body of knowledge. We are editing this as a class, and are planning on continuing to add to the page. As a teacher, I am planning on using this page and adding to it each year with each new class. Please explain why this does not meet the standards and stated mission of the Wikipedia. User: 209.173.17.194 (G. Gambill).

This is besides the point for the time being because this page has been labeled as possible copyright infringement, but I will still be welcome to explain myself. I do not feel that there were any grounds for the speedy deletion of the page, however the template was removed without due process and I was simply returning it for that reason while I looked up Wikipedia policy in order to confirm my belief that it was not a candidate for speedy deletion. I have found this to indeed be the case, but now more appropriate action has been taken. --Canderson7

Can I explain what is going on here. First, the page is not a speedy deletion candidate - to be that is must essentially be nonsense. What you should do if this happens is to explain why the page should not be deleted here on the talk page. Don't worry, no admin is going to delete the page when it looks like it did and has talk on its talk page.

However the issue with the page is that is doesn't fit in with the rest of Wikipedia. A page on Ocean Animals should really give an overview of all the animals that live in the ocean. Instead of having a section on Brain Coral, the information about Brain Coral should go in the article on Brain coral. I understand that getting students to do this and getting them to interact with the other Wikipedia users is going to be a problem.

I marked the article as possible copyright violation because it cited an encyclopedia article for every section. Usually that means that someone has just copied a whole encyclopedia into Wikipedia. If you can assure me that that is not the case, and everything has been rewritten in the student's own words I'm happy to remove the notice and revert to the working version.

Maybe your students could actually add info to Brain coral etc. That would be much more in keeping with the Wikipedia project. DJ Clayworth 19:17, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Clayworth. Thank you for your insight. I can assure you that the information has been restated from a three source research project. The students have, of course, copied facts and figures given such as average length, age etc, but the rest has been paraphrased from the sources listed. It appears as though by listing sources, we have sent up several red flags. It was my assumption that this was a good thing to do so that others could view and check our sources. If this is not the case, please let us know. The whole goal of this page was to try to give an encyclopedia article page that would be kid friendly. This is why my students explain terms such as "dorsal" and "blowhole". We have found that most encyclopedias are so technical that they are unusable for younger learners, hence the idea for this project. It was our hope that by providing this resource, and adding to it over the years, collaborating with others, we could make a reference that would be useable and understandable to kids and adults alike. Is this really such a bad idea? This is an honest question, I would welcome your thoughts since you responded so cordially and seem to be trying to be helpful. As an aside, this project has an alternate learning goal of promoting scholarship, writing and editing (we edit as a group. This page, before it was taken away, for example, was edited by the students last night as a homework assignment). This editing will help to ensure accuracy and reliability of the information. We are fully aware that others will be looking at our information, so we have a responsibility to be accurate. It was also my understanding that this editing process would not trouble anyone as I thought that the page would be an unseen "orphan" until we linked it to the main encyclopedia though another article. Apparently, thi is not the case. In regards to your suggestion, we would prefer to make a single page, and build on it year after year. If, however, this is viewed as unacceptable to whoever is in chare of the wikipedia, we will either abandon our work, or try to follow your suggestion of adding to an existing article. This will not centralize this resource, however, which was a goal of mine. What do you think? I would welcome your feedback. User: 209.173.17.194, G. Gambill

School Project

Mr./Mrs./Ms. G. Gambill, please see Wikipedia:School and university projects - instructions for teachers and lecturers--Duk 16:57, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second what Duk just said above. Furthermore, the content of this article is already covered in other articles; Anglerfish, Brain coral, Clownfish, Humpback Whale. I note that brain coral is a stub. Your students could enhance that article significantly. However, creating a new article such as this one that has information that exists in other articles is not appropriate. I encourage you to see the link that Duk posted above. --Durin 05:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And also see Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Lowercase_second_and_subsequent_words. --Dmcdevit 22:58, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Copy vio

Copyvio has been removed (misunderstanding between source citing and copyright violation)--Duk 16:57, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete

I don't see that this article meets Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, so I have not restored the speedy tag after taking off the copyvio tag. Article needs to go through VFD if anyone is so inclined. --Duk 16:57, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]