User talk:StudiousReader
Welcome!
Hello, StudiousReader, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --RekishiEJ (talk) 14:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Some thoughts[edit]
I have noticed the difficulties you've been having at one of the Catholic pages. Your edits read like an argument rather than reporting. You shouldn't say things like "the above is false because" in fact, you can't really say "observers remark that this is contrary to ..." unless you have a cite to the effect that someone else has said it ... you can indeed say such things on many pages without needing a specific cite but rarely can you do so on a page that has a lot of controversy. I think that you can point to your validly referenced documents with a "however, there are documents after this time such as ... " and then quote the document. In that case you're only stating facts and not "synthesizing". I think it's also reasonable to say something like "Henry Lea mentions xxxx in 1878..." It would be reasonable to say, "The problem is not necessarily of recent occurence as Henry Lea writing in xxxx presents a long history" ... there will be battles on this too but try to remember not to write as an argument or a refutation, you're not out to prove anyone right or wrong but to present the facts in as neutral a way as possible. Hope that helps. HarmonicSeries (talk) 04:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)