User talk:Stewartjordan625

This user is a student editor in University_at_Albany/Information_Literacy_in_the_Humanities_and_Arts_(Fall_2020) .

You have an overdue training assignment.

Please complete the assigned training modules. --TrudiJ (talk) 12:22, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Stewartjordan625, 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) 21:22, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have an overdue training assignment.

Please complete the assigned training modules. --TrudiJ (talk) 10:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have an overdue training assignment.

Please complete the assigned training modules. --TrudiJ (talk) 16:45, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Stewartjordan625. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 21:50, 13 September 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Welcome! II

Hello, Stewartjordan625, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Stewartjordan625! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Common Mistakes, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Review

I have reviewed your article! --Bekah01 (talk) 01:51, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. The change to the lead made the direction of the writing clearer . Expanding on the definition of objectivity made it clearer to me as the reader since I do not have prior knowledge on the subject.

2. The addition of the section called critique of moral objectivity helped to further expand and add more information to the writing. This helps to clarify and dig deeper into moral objectivism.

3.

4. The content was neutral because even though there is a section on the critique of objectivity, it was soley information based. It provided a deeper analysis in moral objectivity and allowed the reader to better understand. It was not written persuasively.

5. The sources were mainly published books which would be reliable. These sources gave the ability to expand more on the information on the information already provided. Also, it provides clear coverage on the already written article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TT2432 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]