User talk:Rachelcc826
| This user is a student editor in UC_San_Diego/HIEA_140_China_since_1978_(Spring_2022) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Rachelcc826, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; 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. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Your draft
[edit]
I returned your draft to your sandbox, because it isn't ready for mainspace yet. There are a few issues that need to be addressed.
- Your article needs to begin with a lead section that summarizes all the major points of the article. Right now, what you have is more of an introduction. Ideas like population growth, waste management, transport and air pollution aren't the focus on this article, and shouldn't be in the lead at all. If they're important for context, you can mention them in passing in the article, giving the average reader enough context to keep going, and link to the main article on the topic for those who want to learn more, or aren't familiar enough with the topic already.
- Outside of the lead, every statement you make needs to be tied directly to a reliable source. After the statement, there should be a source. You can use a single source to support several sentences in a row, if it supports everything you say in those sentences, but you need to have at least one source per paragraph, and you shouldn't have any text after the final reference in a paragraph.
- You need to copy-edit your work. For example, you say
Similarly, China burned the use of various bio-hazardous materials in packaging
. Do you mean banned? - You should present all sides of the issues you cover - you can't just present the advantages without addressing any disadvantages (whether you agree with them or not is beside the point, you're supposed to report on what reliable sources say about the topic).
- You shouldn't have a "conclusions" section. Wikipedia articles are just supposed to present what reliable sources say about a topic, they shouldn't draw conclusions. That's not the way encyclopaedia articles are written. Conclusions are for essays that seek to make a point, or guide the reader to some idea. Wikipedia articles should be be written from a neutral point of view.
- Please have a look at pages 7-9 in the Editing Wikipedia brochure that I have linked to. It has a lot of helpful information about article layout. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:04, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Moved again
[edit]- I moved your draft back to your sandbox. As I said previously
Your article needs to begin with a lead section that summarizes all the major points of the article. Right now, what you have is more of an introduction. Ideas like population growth, waste management, transport and air pollution aren't the focus on this article, and shouldn't be in the lead at all. If they're important for context, you can mention them in passing in the article, giving the average reader enough context to keep going, and link to the main article on the topic for those who want to learn more, or aren't familiar enough with the topic already.
- You haven't made any major changes to your lead section at all. Not only do you still have a lot of information that's not specific to recycling in China (but is either general information about recycling, or general information about environmental issues in China) but you've also added a lot of non-specific information. For example, you added a section about the recycling process, but it all seems to be general information that's not specific to China.
- In general, you need to tighten your writing up. The background section begins with
China is one such country that has been affected by environmental pollution. That is because of its overpopulation and industrialization. China is known to be among some of the World's supergiants in industrialization. That is evident from the variety of products that China exports and produces. Some of the products include vehicles, metals, and many other industrial materials. It is argued that China is the number one Industrial exporter to other continents, especially Africa. Today, China has built and supervised most African countries’ roads, railway lines, and many other infrastructures. Therefore, people can imagine how much more China does within its boundaries. The population of China, as mentioned earlier, is also estimated at 1.402 billion people as per the 2020 statistics. This population, however, lives in a landmass with a surface area worth only approximately 38,000 square kilometers.
- You can't start a section, with "one such country". You're saying it's a member of some class of countries, but you haven't yet explained what this class of countries is. The first sentence of your section is prime real estate - this is all most people are going to read. You need to present your most important information right up front.
That is because of its overpopulation and industrialization.
You haven't told your reader what "that" is, so this sentence is incomplete.- The source you're using to support these two statements is about surface ozone pollution. It's not a general source about environmental pollution - it only speaks about ozone. It doesn't attribute pollution directly to industrialisation, and it says nothing at all about population. You need to make sure that your sources support the claims that they're being cited in support of.
- The rest of your paragraph lacks any sources at all. You say that "China is known to be among some of the World's supergiants in industrialization" but known by whom? And what is a "supergiant"? You need to be clear in your attribution, and specific in your claims. Similarly with "it is argued" (by whom?) and "today" (Wikipedia articles are undated, and continue to to updated by different people, so "today" is meaningless).
Today, China has built and supervised most African countries’ roads, railway lines, and many other infrastructures.
Not only is this claim unsupported by a source, it's also ambiguous and somewhat dubious. Are you really saying that most of the roads in Africa were "built and supervised" by China? How does that tally with the fact that in most parts of Africa less than half the roads are paved? (Again, you need to be specific and factual with the claims you add to Wikipedia.) And again, this is getting very far from the topic of the article - recycling in China.- ((tq|Therefore, people can imagine how much more China does within its boundaries.}} "Therefore" suggests that you're leading readers to a conclusion, which doesn't belong in Wikipedia. "People can imagine" isn't a descriptive, factual statement of the sort that belongs in Wikipedia.
- The whole article has problems of this sort. They need to be fixed before you can move your work to mainspace. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)