User talk:Timothy Cecere

Timothy Cecere, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Timothy Cecere! 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 Cullen328 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Timothy Cecere, 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) 19:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notes on draft

Hi - I (along with Drmies) was asked by your professor (Prof.bgreg) to look at your draft and give you some feedback. Drmies removed the content since it read too much like an essay and had a lot of unverified content. I have to agree with this, as it's written in more of a persuasive, narrative tone than the style that Wikipedia prefers. Another thing I noticed was that the section didn't really have a lot of sourcing, so it was a little undersourced. This makes me a bit concerned that some of the content may be original research - that is to mean that you drew your own conclusions based on existing material, even if the conclusion is not explicitly stated in the source. On Wikipedia we can only state things that have been stated by other people - in other words content should just be a summary of existing material. (That's a bit of an oversimplification of what Wikipedia articles are, but it's still fairly accurate.)

This is something that can honestly be difficult to get used to on here - it's something that I took a while to get used to, so I know that the essay tone and unverified content wasn't intentional. I think that what you have is good as far as essays go, it just needs to be re-written for Wikipedia's purposes and have some additional sourcing thrown in. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:34, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shalor (Wiki Ed), it took me a long time to get out of the academic argumentative mode. Now I find it hard to write outside of this encyclopedic mode! Drmies (talk) 16:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most definitely! That's something I ran into as well! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:38, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]