User talk:Fudymben

Hi Fudymben! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 13:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Fudymben, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Response

Hi, I have some feedback.

• I want to warn you about the term "synthesize" on Wikipedia, which you used on my talk page. On here the word refers to a person's completely new theories and data that they created on their own as opposed to summarizing existing sourcing. In other words, they drew comparisons and conclusions that weren't in the sourcing they used in their work or they didn't use sourcing at all. It's really important that you not do this and that you avoid using this word to describe writing article content where you're summarizing sourcing.

• With the content in the first section, I don't think that the page really needs a definition of what catacombs are, as there is an article for this that the readers can click to if they aren't familiar with the term. The article should focus on the catacombs in Rome and the general history of these.

• For the second section, I have a wider range of advice. I'm assuming that you're covering the general history of catacombs and if so, it's important to make sure that you're not repeating content that's already in the article and that you have a general idea of what will be in this section. To this end, you need to map out what will be in this section while also taking into account what's already in the article. Look at what is covered and where, as well as what could be merged into a history section as well as what shouldn't. This feels kind of unfocused, to be honest, so I would recommend writing out a general outline. I'd start with a general history of when catacombs first began to be used, following by their rise in popularity, Christianity's use and creation of Rome's catacombs (I believe that in some cases they kind of usurped some of the existing catacombs), and so on.

Now if you're focusing on the excavation of catacombs in Rome exclusively, then what you need to look at will be who excavated them first, who was eventually used for this purpose, what they used, how long they took, and what went into the decisions to excavate a certain area. As with the other note, you will need to make sure that you aren't being redundant to existing sections. For example, mentioning that the first ones were excavated by the Etruscans and then detailing how they did it and so on is fine, since this isn't covered in the section specific to them. However if you were to give a wider history of them using catacombs, that would be redundant to the existing section, since it wouldn't really make sense to merge that section completely into a section that's specifically about how the catacombs were made.

• Sourcing-wise, what you have is fine but I would definitely try to find more.

I hope this helps! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)