Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/May 2007/andywo
Case Filed On: 06:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Your problem:
[edit]My problem is an article deletion based on faulty reasoning and a lack of careful attention to the debate.
To summarize: The entry was not OR, because it is based on four peer reviewed articles. Moreover, two published pieces (an article and a thesis) also cite the term, addressing its uses and limitations. It has been evaluated by editorial boards in two different discplines. What else is necessary to get a term listed in wikipedia?
I would be grateful if an objective and disinterested admin could review the debate here: [[1]] and suggest options for an appropriate resolution.
Followup:
[edit]When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:
Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
- Answer:
Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
- Answer:
On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
- Answer:
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
- Answer:
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
- Answer:
If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
- Answer:
If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
- Answer:
AMA Information
[edit]Case Status: NEW
Advocate Status:
- None assigned.