User talk:Moore4jp

Moore4jp, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Moore4jp! 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 John from Idegon (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Moore4jp, 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) 18:03, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

PEER REVIEW

1) LEAD IS GOOD, PROVIDES ADEQUATE INFORMATION

2) ORDER OF SECTIONS IS GOOD ALREADY. STARTS WITH THE OVERVIEW, THEN LABELS, THEN LEGISLATION AND OTHER DETAILS. THIS GIVES THE READER A GOOD SENSE OF THE PAGE AND TEACHES THEM IN A GOOD ORDER.

3) BALANCING ACT: THIS IS FINE, BUT I THINK MORE INFORMATION SHOULD BE ADDED ABOUT THE HISTORY OF CRUELTY FREE MAKEUP LIKE WHEN THE CALL FOR THIS STARTED, KEY BRANDS OR PEOPLE INVOLVED IN MAKING THIS CHANGE TO THE INDUSTRY, AND HOW THE DEFINITION OF CRUELTY FREE HAS CHANGED AS THE RULES HAVE GOTTEN MORE SPECIFIC.

ALSO, I WOULD DELETE THE SECTIONS ABOUT EACH INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES. THEYRE REALLY SHORT AND DONT REALLY MATTER

4) INFO IS PRETTY NEUTRAL, BUT ADD INFO ABOUT PETA STRETCHING THE TRUTH AND NEWS ABOUT THEM POSTING FALSE INFORMATION ALL THE TIME ONLINE

5) GOOD ENOUGH SOURCES, BUT YOUTUBERS ARENT RELIABLE SOURCES UNLESS THEY ACTUALLY PRODUCE THE MAKEUP. FIND ARTICLES PUBLISHED BY ACTUAL SCIENTISTS OR PEOPLE THAT DO NOT WORK AT THE COMPANY WITHOUT BIAS FROM AN ACADEMIC JOURNAL. A YOUTUBER HAS NO EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING.

6) ARTICLE DOES A GOOD JOB IN THE LEAD EXPLAINING WHAT CRUELTY FREE MAKEUP IS AND THE ARTICLE AS A WHOLE STAYS PRETTY WELL ON TOPIC. BUT IT NEEDS MORE INFO ABOUT HISTORY AND THE JOURNEY TO CRUELTY FREE AS WELL AS GIVING A BETTER VIEW INTO WHAT PETA ACTUALLY IS.

Wainscemuc (talk) 14:53, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

<3

Wainscemuc (talk) 14:53, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Copyright and plagiarism

Hello, I received a notification that you had posted material verbatim from content that had previously been published elsewhere to your article. This is seen as a copyright issue and plagiarism, even if you were to include the original source as a citation. Always be careful when writing article content - a good way to avoid doing this is to take notes while reading and write your article from those notes.

Unless the material is explicitly marked as falling into the public domain or was released under a compatible Creative Commons license, it should be assumed that the content is copyrighted in a way that would prohibit it from being used verbatim elsewhere. It's always best to write things in your own words, as this can help prevent issues like this from arising. I would like for you to review the module on plagiarism and copyright, thanks. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Paraphrasing?

Hi Jillian--

I received this notification today as well. Any idea what's happening? Have you just not paraphrased the article yet? Let me know how I can help! Hammona (talk) 20:11, 2 November 2018 (UTC)