User talk:PhysicianReader

Welcome!

Hello, PhysicianReader, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Killing of Freddie Gray did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Introduction to referencing
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, E.Fl! I am not sure what you are referring to as 'original research'. I should say more about my intended edits. This is a review of the circumstances of Gray's death, and is determined by: 1) a review of the video evidence (which will be referenced); 2) a review of ALL of the available trial testimony, cited and referenced when pertinent; ; 3) A review of transcribed testimony given during the Police Investigation of the circumstances of his death, obtained under the FOIA act; 4) the clarification of medical concepts (such as 'what is an autopsy, what is forensic evidence). These statements, such as the determination of time of death, are derived from my medical qualifications .opinions, such as those of physicians, are cited and attributed when pertinent. Please let me know if you have any specific challenges as we go along. (PhysicianReader (talk) 14:23, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you are describing your own original research, but Wikipedia requires references to independent, secondary, reliable sources. Your book may be well-researched and thoughtful but since it is self-published, we cannot verify it passes the requirement for fact-checking. Please refrain from adding text and deleting sources already included in the article. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting directly from transcripted trial testimony is research in a certain sense, but it does present the primary source, and should be acceptable. Would you agree? maw PhysicianReader (talk) 13:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are the trial transcripts published an publically available? — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 14:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are. maw PhysicianReader (talk) 20:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When you add text based on a transcript, whether a direct quote or paraphrased/summarized text, just add a citation specifying the transcript title and date. It doesn't have to be linked to a url, but it needs to be complete enough so anyone can look it up and verify it. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 00:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]