Thanks for feedback  Thanks for your comments on Evolutions second law of thermodynamics fallacy  It is very helpful to have made clear the reasons for refusal You are correct the subject is covered in Entropy and life  The open system argument is given there to explain Schrodingers paradox  Lehningers argument that the order produced within cells is more than compensated for by the disorder they create excess entropy is also given to reconcile the second law and evolution  What is lacking is this new understanding that the above arguments while correct are not sufficient to explain what they purport to do  This leads to an important misconception  That evolution is able to overcome the second law is worthy of full understanding It is noteworthy that the author of the main reference and one of the references used for this submission are cited in Entropy and life  That there is only a single main reference can be attributed to the newness of the insight February  and the information has not had time to be disseminated  Is not asking for more than a single peer reviewed journal reference a very high standard LEBOLTZMANN   Your draft article  is written more in the form of an essay than an encyclopedia article and Wikipedia is not the place for that Also you cannot use other Wikipedia articles as references To be useful to readers to be in context the information you want to convey should be added to the existing article Having a new article will do noting to correct the misconception you are referring to and I suspect the same thing is probably mentioned in several other articles without being fully explained  By the way please dont think Im trying to be difficult on grounds of not understanding that the fallacy you are writing about is based on a gross misunderstanding is fairly obvious to anyone with a decent understanding of physics That the article youre using in a source is in The American Biology Teacher instead of a scientific journal also makes it pretty blatant that its just an explanation and not original reseaarch Its simply that this is a case where your goal would be better served by improving the discussion of the matter in other places instead of writing a new article   since you had previously declined this also any comments