User talk:Jdadler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peer Review fiction

I have just closed the Articles for deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peer Review fiction and deleted the page "Peer Review Fiction". The main concern is that the topic does not meet the important guideline Wikipedia:Notability, because it is still a hypothetical process that has not attracted notice beyond its creator. To be verifiable Wikipedia articles must be based on what has been written elsewhere and not on the original research of its contributors. We prefer reliable sources such as newspapers or peer-reviewed academic journals. This means that Wikipedia does not cover new ideas until they have become accepted or at least widely debated. Eluchil404 20:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

question: I am confused. the site has members, in fact membership is growing weekly, so it is not hypothetical. yes, I am the creator, but it is a brand new concept. there is no one to write an article elsewhere. should I have had some sock puppet write the article for me? would that sort of dishonesty have been better? I doubt it. it wont be in an academic journal, its not academic. I am attempting to document its existence before other's duplicate it. I cannot copyright the title, nor patent the concept. wikipedia is an encyclopedia, no? this exists in reality. it has participation and therefore is functional. btw, here is a debate about it on netscape. if you do a google for digcreation, you will find many places it is being discussed. --JDAdler 02:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)