User talk:Dvdsndvdsn

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hello, Dvdsndvdsn, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made to Defense Acquisition Board seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Drmies--It wasn't a test, I just noticed there was an error in the article and that the article lacked citations and added them. Can you explain why the article was deleted? Your explanations for the sources don't make sense--the Defense Acquisition University and MITRE sources I cited are not primary sources. These are third party organizations that have no relation to the Defense Acquisition Board, and are reporting information about the DAB. To my understanding, the articles cited appear to adhere to the 'No original research' guidance around secondary sources. Can you clarify why that is not the case?
 * No, those things are not secondary sources. "Have no relation to" suggests that there is no relationship between the Department of Defense and this board when it is "chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and includes the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Service Secretaries (Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy and Secretary of the Air Force), as well as a number of Under Secretaries of Defense". Secondary sources are books and newspapers and academic journals. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 00:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi @Drmies--I am not suggesting there is no relation between the board and the Department of Defense, but that there is no relation between the sources cited and the DAB. Can you point me to a policy clarifying why online sources that are not "books and newspapers and academic journals" do not count as secondary sources? Nothing in the 'No original research' guidance indicates that. Thanks :) Dvdsndvdsn (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi--I'm not sure why you're looking at Original Research; what you need to look at is Secondary source. The other thing you might want to look at (which underlies my redirect) is WP:GNG. No coverage in secondary sources, no notability. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Drmies - I think you'll find that if you read the Original Research guidance that I linked, it does discuss what counts as a secondary source under Wikipedia policy. The article you linked, on the other hand, is just the Wikipedia article about secondary sources, and not specific to Wikipedia policy on what counts for that purpose.
 * I have added additional secondary sources to the article mentioned above. If there is some issue with the New York Times, Washington Post, Institute for Defense Analyses, etc. as reputable secondary sources, please point me to the policy/guidance that outlines that. Thanks! Dvdsndvdsn (talk) 01:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)