User talk:Hannah Crum

Welcome!
Hello, Hannah Crum, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. 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

You may also want to complete 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! Zefr (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Kombucha. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Zefr (talk) 13:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello. There was nothing promotional added at all. Your accusation is false. The page was updated with facts. The facts should be reinstated. Information about what other uses the Kombucha tea or Kombucha SCOBY have are legitimate updates to the facts. Two separate sources are cited. Currently the entire seciont on "other uses" is about drying the culture and making clothes. Do you know how many people do that? Almost no one. Do you know how many people use Kombucha tea and SCOBYs and beauty products? It's a lot more than are making clothes from it. So the information you deleted was more relevant than the information that has been left behind. Information about a 2014 survey paper are facts. The quote comes from the paper. Listing the correct author of an article on BevNet is a fact. Why are you changing facts? This information is all helpful to the reader and relevant to the topic. Wikipedia should welcome contributions from experts in the field, not automatically disqualify all factual changes based on the person doing them. In reviewing the link for "soapboxing" you have provided, nothing in these edits qualifies. The edits should be reinstated. Hannah Crum (talk) 14:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello. I welcome the discussion. First, the BevNet article, written by you, is 7 years out of date and was/is your opinion; WP:OR. An independent WP:SECONDARY source about alcohol levels in different commercial brands should be used; is the industry regulated for alcohol content? It may be valuable to discuss that in the context of allowable limits for regulated beverages, if applicable. The Huff Post article reads like ad puffery with celebrity uses or endorsements; see WP:PEA and WP:ADMASK. Your edit here is just plain baloney. Please don't spam the encyclopedia with nonsense; WP:BOOKSPAM. --Zefr (talk) 15:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Wow, what a disrespectful way to speak. You "welcome the discussion" and then you call published scientific papers "Baloney"? It's a quote from a paper that was published, and it comes from a book that is accepted as the most complete on the subject of Kombucha. As for the BevNet article, it seems you are confused. The article is about a news event that occurred, so it is not out of date, it lists the specific events that happened. And by the way, the article was not added. All the edit on the BevNet article did was update the author names to be correct. It left out one of the authors. So you are showing that you did not pay any attention to the edits you reverted, and simply assumed it was not valid based on who made the edits. Your rude response that does not address the reality of the edits confirms this. You should actually read the articles before you make claims about things. The additional information about the uses for Kombucha tea and SCOBYs is highly relevant and your statement about "celebrity uses" is irrelevant, the question is HOW is kombucha tea and SCOBY used in other ways, and the answer is it is used in beauty products. You are depriving readers of facts. And the best you can offer is disrespectful false statements. This Wikipedia account was established in 2011, and the edits have been very few. This is not spam, these are real facts that improve the page and the edit should 100% be reverted. Hannah Crum (talk) 15:14, 12 June 2018 (UTC)