The contents of the BYU Mars Rover page were merged into University Rover Challenge on 17 March 2023 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 17 July 2022. The result of the discussion was merge. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am in the process of writing this article. As you can see, there are plenty of external references for it, and it should be approaching and initial state of completeness within a few days.
Fredjikrang ( talk) 16:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The rover team has been covered by at least four independent media sources, including Discovery Channel, The Salt Lake Tribune, The Desert News, and The Daily Herald, as well as some interested parties, such as BYU Radio, TV, and newspaper, and the Mars Society website. There is also expected to be additional coverage soon, as the team recently competed in another competition. I would suggest that such coverage is significantly more extensive, and hence makes the team more notable, than many other organizations that have existing pages on Wikipedia.
I do appreciate your patience with the article, and feel that it will be up to all the standards required of a reputable article on Wikipedia.
Fredjikrang ( talk) 17:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The page appears to have had most of its content deleted in the last few minutes. Anyone know why, or how to get it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredjikrang ( talk • contribs) 17:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Corrected. Fredjikrang ( talk) 17:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Some pictures have been selected for the page, but can not be uploaded yet as I only recently registered on Wikipedia. Fredjikrang ( talk) 21:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I am unsure why the article was tagged as needing more sources. It currently has citations from, at bare minimum, three reputable, reliable sources, and at least six secondary sources of varying quality and reach. Some, such as Scientific American and Discover Channel Canada have national or greater audiences. There are some citations from interested parties (BYU news and the Mars Society), but these are in the minority. I do agree that the citations need to be better utilized to support the facts of the article. Fredjikrang ( talk) 19:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I mean no offense, but there is no such thing as completely unbiased coverage, with the best possible coverage including a variety of sources so that all biases are presented fairly. For instance, you say that the Deseret News is "hardly unbiased about BYU," which is probably true, but something for which there is no evidence aside from colloquial opinions, and even if there is a positive bias, as you suggest (which again, I agree is likely, though unsubstantiated) even you agree that the Tribune likely has an negative slant on BYU (again, unsubstantiated) and so by presenting both articles as citations, presents as nearly an unbiased opinion as possible.
Secondly, I find your opinion that "20-30% unbiased coverage is much too small of a percentage" for a WP article a bit absurd. I could easily delete some of the "biased" articles (of which I would submit that there are fewer than you say, putting my estimate at right around 50%) in order to increase the percentage of "unbiased" articles, but in reality it would only reduce the amount of information substantiating the article. I think it much more relevant to talk about the number of good sources for an article, than the percentage that might be biased. This article has a decent-to-good number of good sources for it, and many more than a lot of other articles already existing on Wikipedia. In fact, I find the continual attention and attacks on this article to be somewhat absurd, considering some other articles that I have seen, which may have one reference, if any, and yet have never even been considered for deletion.
In short, I am more than willing to change the citations by deleting some of the more obviously biased sources, such as the Mars Society or BYU News, but I think that it would be a mistake. I also find the number of articles on Wikipedia that have fewer good sources than this article to be a sufficient reason to not consider this article for deletion, at least not at the current time or in the near future. Fredjikrang ( talk) 20:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on BYU Mars Rover. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:42, 6 November 2020 (UTC)