User talk:ClaytFost

Your edits on Harryplax
Thanks for expanding Harryplax. However, you have introduced a confusing, inconsistent citation system of embedded external links and context-free citations: The list of numbered references in the References section does not clearly correspond the inline citations: you should use the inline citation method: format to automatically number references (helpful if text or references are subsequently re-ordered), and more durably tie references to the statement they verify. See Citing sources and Help:Referencing for beginners for more info. Also, take care to not introduce any improper synthesis or extraneous, tangential information: the article, as well as references, should be directly related to the subject. Straying too much from directly related references increases the chances (or appearance) of original research. For example, Mendoza, & Ng 2017 do not discuss the life cycle of H. severus at all: in the absence of immediate sources that do, your addition appears to be inferring and synthesizing things that are not directly verified, even if they turn out to be true. In this way, Wikipedia articles are different than term papers, essays, or review articles: you or I cannot add any of our opinions or inferences. See also Advice for students and Expert editors. Please don't be discouraged from editing, there are a lot of rules and guidelines for editing, but understanding the three core content policies of neutrality, verifiability, and No original research will immensely improve your contributions. Cheers! --Animalparty! (talk) 04:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)