User talk:Asli Theobald

June 2020
Hello, I'm David Tornheim. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Centering prayer, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --David Tornheim (talk) 03:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for leaving a message on my talk page regarding your concerns. I will respond shortly here.  In the meantime, I am posting a welcome template.   with links

It contains a number of links which I suggest you look over, so you understand how things work here. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Centering prayer
On my talk page you posted:
 * subject: Centering prayer edit
 * Dear David,
 * I'm Asli Theobald, a practitioner of Centering Prayer for many years who has diligently looked under every stone for the correct way to practice the technique. I've transcended thought countless times by repeating my sacred word exactly as I've outlined, experiencing the state described by the word "metanoia" in the Bible which means going beyond thought or transcending thought, further explained by Psalm 46:10. As I'm trying to pull all of my references together, I ask you to please leave my article as is for the next two days during which I promise to include all citations. Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asli Theobald (talk • contribs) 04:07, 19 June 2020(UTC)

I'm replying here. I understand you are a new user and probably are not familiar with how things are done here: It's easy to edit; it's difficult to get edits to stick if you don't have WP:RS that supports it. First, please make sure to WP:SIGN your posts with ~. Above you said, please leave my article as is for the next two days during which I promise to include all citations --David Tornheim (talk) 05:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC) Your further questions & my answers: Thank you so much for your guidelines, it's almost midnight here and I'll study them carefully tomorrow. Good night
 * 1) You don't WP:OWN the article.  Please read WP:OWN.  The article was created 14 years ago.  It's had 140 editors, 37 of which have it on their watchlist.  The page is viewed 100 times per day.
 * So, no, we don't let editors take control of the page and add unsourced material, sorry.
 * 1) Instead, you can work on a draft in your WP:SANDBOX.  If you do, I recommend you mention your intention to do so on the talk page, and ask experienced editors to review your work.
 * 2) Personal experiences don't count on Wikipedia when it comes to content, which is why editors can be completely anonymous. For the most part (aside from WP:COI, we don't care that much who you are or where you have been, what you have done, or whether you are a self-proclaimed or even a credentialed expert. Instead we are only interested in articles that are properly sourced (WP:RS) with content that can be verified (WP:V).
 * 3) I've transcended thought  I suggest caution in saying things like this on-Wiki. There is  a group of editors calling themselves "Skeptics" (Skeptical movement) that hold sway here.  Statements like these have oft been used by these "Skeptics" to discredit an editor in the eyes of their adherents, in order to get the upper hand in content and behavioral disputes.  "Guerrilla Skeptics"  have  recruited members to rid Wikipedia of "woo" and the "purveyors of woo".  Anything in the field of Complementary and alternative medicine, eastern medicine, meditation, yoga, etc. are in their cross-hairs.  I have heard comments that suggest they believe that anyone who uses the techniques of CAM are lunatics.  To avoid this, just stick to what the sources (WP:RS) say, and be careful not to cite any sources they would classify as "woo".
 * 4) Wikipedia's way of determining what is and is not a reliable source goes way beyond what is written in the core policy WP:RS.  See also WP:RS/P and WP:RS/N (and especially make sure to search archives) if you have a specific source in mind and want to know if editors have formed opinions as to whether it is reliable or not.
 * Thanks for studying the guidelines and for your patience. --David Tornheim (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you please send me the original version of your article, I may have messed up a citation, I'm SO sorry, this is the very first Wikipedia edit I've ever done!!!
 * All versions and edits to the article can easily be found by clicking on the "version history" tab. For that article, this link should bring it up. See:  Help:Page history --David Tornheim (talk) 05:51, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm a bit lost here and may need a bit more time, please feel free to re-post your original Centering Prayer article as I figure out how these articles are properly edited here in the most persuasive manner useful to all. TERRIBLY sorry again for assuming Wikipedia editing would be straight forward, thank you so much for your patience with first time editors!
 * Thank you also for your patience. --David Tornheim (talk) 05:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

All guidelines you've sent is so useful, thanks again! I'm looking up all of my sources and will ask you guys to look at my edit before posting again. Asli Theobald (talk) 14:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Centering prayer
Hi Asli Theobald. Regarding Centering prayer, what's your source? You may have years of experience, but Wikipedia presents what WP:RS have written about topics, not what we ourselves found out. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!  05:42, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry about my Centering Prayer article edit without citing proper sources, it's the first time I've ever edited Wikipedia but I'm now familiarizing myself with the process. I'm looking up all of my sources and will ask you guys to look at my edit before posting again. Thanks a million for your patience with first-time editors like me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asli Theobald (talk • contribs) 13:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)Asli Theobald (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * FYI. The reason you are getting notices from multiple editors who are quickly reverting your edits that lack sources:
 * We use anti-vandalism software (e.g. Twinkle, Huggle) that are powerful tools that detects a number of different kinds of edits that are likely to violate our policies. One of the things huggle flags is large blocks of unsourced text by new editors. (We are not accusing you of vandalism.)
 * New editors who continue to break rules, will get "templated" (WP:DTR) with repeated warnings with increasing severity of admonishment when the same behavior continues.
 * Editors who keep breaking the rules after 4 warnings are typically blocked for at least 24 hours.
 * You're not the first editor to be turned down for asking us to wait for you to find sources before we quickly delete unsourced text to an article. --David Tornheim (talk) 18:57, 19 June 2020 (UTC)