# Wikipedia Won't Accept My Mount Rushmore Submission. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [October 17, 2007, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007 "2007-10-17T06:40:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Jim\_B](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jim_b/32/4338_2.png) [@Jim\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_B)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2007, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/1 "2007-10-17T06:40:08Z")
As I have already [said](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=440124) on these boards, a while back, I discovered coincidences involving the four presidents’ names on Mount Rushmore. As I’ve said, I don’t know what is responsible for coincidences in the world, if anything. But I think I have found some that are noteworthy. So a couple of days ago, I submit the Mount Rushmore story to wikipedia, and they reject it! [Here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-10-08#Mount_Rushmore_Coincidences.) is where the rejected article is still found. And do they reject it for content? No. They claim: > [@](#): > > We cannot accept unsourced suggestions or sources that are not reliable per the verifiability policy. Please provide reputable, third-party sources with your suggestions. Third party sources are needed both to establish the verifiability of the submission as well as its notability. How am I to find a third-party source for something I discovered myself? FYI, for my sources, I simply wrote: > [@](#): > > You can simply go to the Mount Rushmore Park website [5], or any place that lists the presidents on Mount Rushmore (like Wikipedia itself [6])to verify what I have said about the names. Synchronicity was proposed by the Swiss psychologist and paranormal investigator Carl Gustav Jung. There are many websites that have info on it (like for example [7]), and like wikipedia, again[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity.By](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity.By) the way, I shared this story with the park ranger at Mount Rushmore via email, and apparently he tells the story to tourists now too. Alright, I admit I could have phrased it all better. But now I find out I can resubmit my story, if (again) I have the right sources. How do I do this? (I.e., where do I find these third-party sources?) Thank you to all who reply and help 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2007, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/2 "2007-10-17T06:59:29Z")
Well, the reason for it being rejected is stupid and flat-out wrong. However, IMHO, the coincidences are pretty mundane and not at all interesting. No attempt at offense here, I just don’t get what’s so particularly noteworthy about them. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2007, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/3 "2007-10-17T07:02:33Z")
One of the principles of Wikipedia seems to be that you can’t use it to publish your own research. But, IMHO, that’s not the real problem. This stuff about coincidences which may have no statistical significance does not belong in an encyclopedia, full stop. ---
**Author:** ![Walton\_Firm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/45deac/32.png) [@Walton\_Firm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walton_Firm)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2007, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/4 "2007-10-17T08:13:25Z")
Check out Wikipedia’s [No Original Research](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research) policy. The purpose of an encyclopaedia is to collect and summarize the existing body of knowledge, not to publish new ideas. So anything you want to include in a Wikipedia article needs to have been published in at least one notable publication already (note the ‘notable’ part: a personal blog or a message board post doesn’t count, unless it’s a very well-known and widely referenced one). The fact that your discoveries can be objectively verified is irrelevant: if you’re the first one to notice them (or at least to make a big deal out of them) then it’s still original research, hence forbidden. An yes, I agree with the other posters that the coincidences you discovered are not particularly interesting. However, that’s not the main criterium. If you discovered a cure for cancer, it would not be accepted into Wikipedia unless you can first get it published somewhere else. On the other hand, if you manage to spread the word about your discoveries to the point where it becomes part of the established body of lore about Mt Rushmore, then the Wikipedia editors would probably grudgingly allow it to be included. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2007, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/5 "2007-10-17T23:55:40Z")
Quite apart from the dubious nature of this proposal, look at the writing style you used: > [@](#): > > When You count the number of letters in our four famous Presidents appearing on Mt. Rushmore in the following order, you find this astounding coincidence: > > Abraham Lincoln has 14 LETTERS in it… Thomas Jefferson has 15 LETTERS in it… George Washington has 16 LETTERS in it… Theodore Roosevelt has 17 LETTERS in it… > > THIS SEEMS TO ALMOST “BUILD” ON THE NUMBER 13–THE NUMBER OF OUR ORIGINAL COLONIES. Also interesting, “Mount Rushmore” and “Gutzon Borglum” (the sculptor of Mt. Rushmore) have 13 LETTERS EACH. > > What accounts for these and other amazing coincidences is not clear. But the Swiss psychologist and paranormal investigator Carl Gustav Jung termed the phenomenon synchronicity -Shouting -ellipses -‘astounding/amazing coincidence’ This is not the writing style of a reference work - it’s the way those tinfoil-hat chain email hoaxes are worded. ---
**Author:** ![qubed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f07891/32.png) [@qubed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/qubed)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/6 "2007-10-18T00:10:49Z")
You’re article would also probably fall under the “Avoid lists of trivia” policy > **[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Trivia_sections)** > > Avoid creating lists of miscellaneous information. It was once common practice on Wikipedia for articles to include lists of isolated information, which were often grouped into their own section. These sections were typically given names such as "Trivia", "Facts", "Miscellanea", "Other information" and "Notes" (not to be confused with "Notes" sections that store reference citation footnotes). For an example of this practice, see the John Lennon trivia section from December 10, 2005. This style gu... ---
**Author:** ![ASAKMOTSD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@ASAKMOTSD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASAKMOTSD)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/7 "2007-10-18T00:22:28Z")
Perhaps you can site your post on IMDB as your third party source? ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/8 "2007-10-18T11:31:26Z")
[QUOTE=Walton Firm] So anything you want to include in a Wikipedia article needs to have been published in at least one notable publication already (note the ‘notable’ part: a personal blog or a message board post doesn’t count, unless it’s a very well-known and widely referenced one). [/QUOTE] So how is it that I often see articles in Wikipedia that include the comment “[citation needed]”? e.g. this article has several [Yves Duteil - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Duteil) or this one [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_The\_Rutles\_fictional\_albums](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Rutles_fictional_albums) ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/9 "2007-10-18T11:44:53Z")
[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried] So how is it that I often see articles in Wikipedia that include the comment “[citation needed]”? [/QUOTE] They aren’t deleting those, because they fall inside the scope of the Wikipedia, and contain information that users might find useful or of interest, but they are marking them as articles that need improvement. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/10 "2007-10-18T11:52:57Z")
[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried] So how is it that I often see articles in Wikipedia that include the comment “[citation needed]”? e.g. this article has several [Yves Duteil - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Duteil) or this one [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_The\_Rutles\_fictional\_albums](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Rutles_fictional_albums) [/QUOTE] Those tags tend to get added after uncited information is edited into an existing article - what they won’t do (apparently) is start a whole new article on that basis. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/11 "2007-10-18T12:29:20Z")
“Who gives a shit” also has 13 LETTERS!!! (OMG!!??11) ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2007, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/12 "2007-10-18T23:55:12Z")
Giles, Mangetout, fair enough. But what Walton Firm said was “anything you want to include in a Wikipedia article needs to have been published in at least one notable publication already”. Instead of saying “citation needed”, shouldn’t the information be removed? ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/13 "2007-10-19T00:03:17Z")
[QUOTE=Arnold Winkelried] Instead of saying “citation needed”, shouldn’t the information be removed? [/QUOTE] Information tagged as needing a cite can be removed at any time. Rather than instantly remove it, tagging it gives editors the opportunity to research the information and find a source. When I tag something for a cite I try to remember to check back in a few weeks to see if it’s been sourced and if it hasn’t been I take it out. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/14 "2007-10-19T00:04:15Z")
If you were going to “build” on the number of our original colonies, wouldn’t it be more coincidental if the 14-15-16-17 names went in chronological order, as Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt? As it is, they’re out of order. I too don’t see what’s particularly astounding, sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Dave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/46a35a/32.png) [@Great\_Dave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Dave)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/15 "2007-10-19T00:44:42Z")
Yeah, so f’ng what. When come back, bring worthy submission. ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_B](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jim_b/32/4338_2.png) [@Jim\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_B)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/16 "2007-10-19T01:15:40Z")
[QUOTE=Duck Duck Goose] If you were going to “build” on the number of our original colonies, wouldn’t it be more coincidental if the 14-15-16-17 names went in chronological order, as Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt? As it is, they’re out of order. I too don’t see what’s particularly astounding, sorry. [/QUOTE] Actually, one person I shared the story with did find some logic to the order of names. I’m sorry, I don’t remember what it was though. Well, alright, I admit the story isn’t unexplainable, or necessarily noteworthy. Still you have to admit it is better than the [9-11 Coincidences](http://www.snopes.com/rumors/coincidence.asp)🙂 . ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/17 "2007-10-19T01:23:31Z")
Did you know Jefferson and Kennedy both had kittens named “Fluffy” ? I think I’ll add it to their pages right now. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/18 "2007-10-19T08:32:23Z")
[QUOTE=Duck Duck Goose] If you were going to “build” on the number of our original colonies, wouldn’t it be more coincidental if the 14-15-16-17 names went in chronological order, as Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt? As it is, they’re out of order. I too don’t see what’s particularly astounding, sorry. [/QUOTE] This aspect escaped my attention completely. So what we have here is essentially the _astounding_ fact that when you explicitly sort numbers into ascending order, they appear in ascending order. Incredible. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/19 "2007-10-19T14:42:50Z")
Did you know that Abraham Lincoln was parked by a driveway, but John F. Kennedy was driven by a parkway? ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2007, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-wont-accept-my-mount-rushmore-submission/423007/20 "2007-10-19T19:22:00Z")
[QUOTE=Jim B.] Actually, one person I shared the story with did find some logic to the order of names. I’m sorry, I don’t remember what it was though. . [/QUOTE] Well, if you look at “W **a** shington, J **e** fferson, L **i** ncoln, R **o** osevelt, R **u** shmore”, you can see that–astoundingly! 😃 --the second letters of their names go in perfect “A-E-I-O-U” vowel order. Which of course has nothing to do with Mt. Rushmore, since they’re up there as Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln, and since Charles E. Rushmore, mining claims lawyer extraordinaire, isn’t up there at all, except in spirit. Just thought I’d mention it. 😃