User talk:Msdv613

Msdv613, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Msdv613! 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 Gestrid (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Msdv613, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with Wiki Education; 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) 20:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Health and medicine topics

Hi! I saw that your edits to Autism—Tics, AD/HD, and other Comorbities were reverted by SandyGeorgia, as they had several issues - one of which was that the source used wasn't usable to back up information about health, medicine, and the self.

• The reason that the source wasn't usable was because it was a study. Studies should generally be avoided unless they're accompanied with a secondary source that reviews the study or comments upon the specific claim that is being stated. The reason for this is that studies are primary sources for any of the claims and research conducted by their authors. The publishers don't provide any commentary or in-depth verification, as they only check to ensure that the study doesn't have any glaring errors that would invalidate it immediately. Study findings also tend to be only true for the specific people or subjects that were studied. For example, a person in one area may respond differently than one in an area located on the other side of the country. Socioeconomic factors (be they for the person or a family member) also play a large role, among other things that can impact a response. As such, it's definitely important to find a secondary source, as they can provide this context, verification, and commentary. Aside from that, there's also the issue of why a specific study should be highlighted over another. For example, someone could ask why one study was chosen as opposed to something that studied a similar topic or had different results.

• The statement is also kind of vague in that it says that the test can be used to provide phenotypic information about other child psychiatric disorders, but doesn't specify which ones, types, or cite an example.

Since this deals with the body and self, you must take this training module on editing in this topic area. This page discusses the requirements in more depth as well. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

• Hi! I saw that you re-introduced content that used the study as a source. I need to stress that this is not seen as a reliable source per the medicine reliable source guidelines and as such, it can (and has) been challenged and removed. Please review the health and medicine training module and do not use studies as sources. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)