User talk:Truegod123

This user is a student editor in College_of_DuPage/Knowledge_in_the_Misinformation_Age_(Spring_2022) .

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Truegod123, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian 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
Editing Wikipedia, a guide for student editors Choosing an article to edit Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions in our FAQ.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mental health article[edit]

With regards to your edits to the mental health article, I wanted to let you know that topics related to human health have more stringent sourcing requirements than most articles on Wikipedia. Please be sure to complete the Editing health and psychology topics training module. You can also check out the sourcing guidelines for these articles. A decent rule of thumb is to stick to review articles that have been published in the last five years.

The helpguide.com site probably wouldn't meet Wikipedia's standards for a reliable source at all. It's certainly not good enough for medical content. The Karger article is a review, which is good, but it's from 2009. An awful lot of research has been published in the last 13 years, so it's likely to be out of date.

The Mayo Clinic article isn't a great source - it's unsigned (only credited to "Mayo Clinic Staff"), undated (so there's no way to tell if it's out of date) and it cites no sources (so there's no way to know what it's based on). What's maybe even more important is the fact that you simply restored your edit without discussion when Praxidicae reverted you. Not only did you restore your content, you didn't even bother to explain anything. What you're doing is edit warring, and it's not acceptable. Please don't do something like that again. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]