- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by Allen3 talk 16:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues
Negativity bias edit
- ... that our instinctive behaviors are super sensitive to the negativity encompassed throughout our world; are we not the positive beings we think we are?
Created/expanded by BrandiCarolyn (talk), Ups46694 (talk). Nominated by BrandiCarolyn (talk) at 06:04, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Article has verifiability and original research tags, and numerous empty sections that have to be addressed before this could be ready for the main page. Hook is not properly formatted–article title needs to be bolded, "super sensitive" sounds odd, and the clause after the semicolon should probably be trimmed. Article title needs to be moved (currently at Wikipedia:Negativity bias). Sasata (talk) 08:38, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
- We have expanded the article so that there are no more blank sections. The article title is now bolded. The article was moved to the correct space. We can change "super sensitive" to "highly sensitive" in order to fix the odd term. So, the new hook should read: "Did you know...our instinctive behaviors are highly sensitive to the negativity encompassed throughout our world; are we not positive human beings? Brandi Carolyn Hull (talk) 19:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Needs a review. Looks like an essay though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it's an essay. Large parts of it are unsourced, and many of the sources that are used look very dubious (personal blogs, personal websites etc). The hook is also unacceptable ("are we not positive human beings?" - yuk). There may be a good article waiting to be written on this topic, but I'm afraid this article isn't it. Prioryman (talk) 08:47, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
