Let's write a Wikipedia article about Free Code Camp (help wanted)

[amorantep]

I can help with the Spanish Translation =)

[janschreiber]

@PortableStick

Would it be more appropriate for us to propose edits here and have @janschreiber enter it in, or should all interested parties be creating a Wikipedia account?

I feel that under the present circumstances, it would actually help a lot if one or two more users joined the process of editing the article. As mentioned by @DarrenfJ , the article was flagged for deletion because it looked like “part of a clear paid advertising campaign”. One of the reasons cited was that I as its main author have a conflict of interest. I can’t even argue with that. Probably any change that I make will be met with some level of distrust in the near future until the dust has settled, so I think I’d do more harm than good for now.

Another problem is, pretty much everybody who reads this forum is not 100 % neutral towards the article’s subject. But then, it is only natural that Wikipedia articles are written by people who take an interest in its subject in some way or other. We only have to make sure it doesn’t look like self-promotion, and ideally link to independent media sources.

[DarrenfJ]

@janschreiber

pretty much everybody who reads this forum is not 100 % neutral towards the article’s subject. But then, it is only natural that Wikipedia articles are written by people who take an interest in its subject in some way or other.

This is definitely one of the things I find odd about wikipedia. I have heard this before… but as you mention how else does an article get started? If not by people who are interested in it in the first place…

[janschreiber]

@DarrenfJ

how else does an article get started? If not by people who are interested in it in the first place…

Come to think of it, this might be one of the fundamental conundrums of Wikipedia. Nobody creates an article about something he isn’t interested in. That’s why the initial article request for freeCodeCamp on Wikipedia went unheard for 18 months.
It’s relatively easy to help improve an article (correct grammar and spelling, add sources etc.), but putting in all the work required to start a new one is something you only do if you are emotionally connected to the subject in some way.
It doesn’t help much if an article is flagged for deletion (rather than necessary improvement) shortly after its creation. This is off-putting for new users. I guess this is similar to what you described as stackoverflow-like experience earlier in this thread. The Wikipedia community often fails to be as welcoming as it should to new users.

[PortableStick]

@janschreiber

Probably any change that I make will be met with some level of distrust in the near future until the dust has settled, so I think I’d do more harm than good for now.

I doubt it’d look good if I made a brand new account and started making changes, either. I have written a few paragraphs, though, and I’m happy to make some edits if it looks good.

[janschreiber]

That would be awesome! Please take a look here before you start:

Wikipedia:Translate us

[janschreiber]

A quick update: One decidedly good thing that came from the deletion discussion is that it attracted the attention of a very helpful admin who helped improve the article and provided additional sources. So far, seven out of seven participants in the discussion voted “keep”, at least one of them is an admin. It has been a very civil, enjoyable and constructive discussion so far.

[DarrenfJ]

It doesn’t help much if an article is flagged for deletion (rather than necessary improvement) shortly after its creation. This is off-putting for new users. I guess this is similar to what you described as stackoverflow-like experience earlier in this thread. The Wikipedia community often fails to be as welcoming as it should to new users.

While this is true, I like following the process and it has been informative to say the least.

haven’t commented in the delete thread since I feel I am heavily COI on this one, as per the above quote. But again, glad the discussion occurred overall…

[CandiW]

Great job to all of you who are working on this article! I looks and reads really good

[janschreiber]

@CandiW Thank you! Nice to get some feedback after all the work we’ve put in.

[janschreiber]

The unanimous result of the deletion discussion on Wikipedia was keep.

Here’s a screenshot from the article’s Talk page:

Again, thanks to all community members who helped making this real!

[the-thief]

Good work.

Seems to me like the person that requested the delete enjoys declining other people’s wikipedia entries.

[janschreiber]

@the-thief

Seems to me like the person that requested the delete enjoys declining other people’s wikipedia entries.

Yeah, maybe. But I don’t blame him at all. All he did was put it on a vote, and he provided evidence for his opinions. Without critical users like him, Wikipedia would be a huge mess. Over the years, it has become very clear that Wikipedia needs a rigid QA mechanism, and nominating articles for deletion is an important part of it.