Talk:Rebecca Rusch

Article needs a major cleanup
The article needs a major cleanup. A lot of the text looks like it has been written by a fan. A lot of sources are primary sources. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:07, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello Rsrikanth05, I'm not sure if this is where I'm supposed reply to you. I'm new to Wikipedia edits and I don't find the interface very user-friendly for the talk page or when reviewing history of those who have undone my edits. Anyway, I do respect that the user community is vigilant about trying to keep wiki entries legit, but "major cleanup" is exactly what I was trying to accomplish, and now it has been undone… There were major updates to be made since the entries by a user named Tom Reding. I am not a "fan," but I am close to the work that this subject has done and is doing. The edits were an effort to supply updates and to do so in as scrupulously factual a manner as possible. I tried to scrub content that looked like editorializing, and honestly I stand by all my edits. I would very much like to see them restored. I do not think you were the user who undid them. I was not done adding citations of other sources, but it's also unclear to me why a primary source is a problem since in this case I believe all sources are legitimate as I understand Wikipedia's rules. None are "tabloid journalism," and I don't believe there is a rule against using the subject's own website as a source. Can anyone help restore my last edits? Teresa.Huk Teresa.Huk (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2019 (UTC)