User talk:Hawhite13

Welcome!
Hello, Hawhite13, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Men's studies
Hi! I have some notes for you:


 * Avoid using wording like "you", "our", and "we". Wikipedia uses third person, as it can come across as more neutral and also feels less like it's coming from a specific person. Words like you and our also tend to assume something of the reader, even if this wasn't the intention of the author. This goes over it in a bit more depth.


 * You should also avoid any point of view terms such as "unique", "successful", or "important", as these are going to be subjective to the reader. For example, what may be unique to one may not be to the next person. If you're pulling it from the source (where one person says that something is unique), it's important that this is attributed to that person along the lines of "According to" or "Jane Smith states that...". It doesn't have to be exactly like that, but it should be clear that it's this person's specific viewpoint.


 * Be extremely careful with sourcing. For example, you use this blog as a source at one point. Looking over the site, it's unclear how much editorial oversight is applied to the blog posts or who is doing the editing. This is important to take into consideration because if the content doesn't have any true editorial oversight then we need to help show reliability through another avenue, such as where it's routinely cited as a reliable source by reliable sources such as scholarly and academic sources. For example, if only students are doing the editing, then it will pose an issue of reliability because student publications don't always apply the same type or strength of editorial oversight that a non-student publication might. Keep in mind that although this is affiliated with a notable institution, this doesn't always guarantee that the work has gone through editing or necessarily correct.
 * Now granted, I do think that this is most likely reliable since it seems to be run by the department as far as I can tell (which is good, since they're more likely to be vigorous with editing), but it's always important to make sure that you use the strongest possible sources.


 * Make sure that you're only summarizing the source material as opposed to interpreting it and drawing ties that aren't explicitly stated in the source itself. I removed this section because I wasn't sure if the material was your interpretation of the source or if you were summarizing it:
 * As men’s studies is a part of a section on masculism, this creates a fundamental issue because the origins of masculism are for the advancement of the rights of men, in direct opposition of women fighting for women’s rights. Synonyms of masculism include anti-feminism, which is an inaccurate portrayal of what masculinities studies stands for. It can be a misleading assumption that since it is named “men’s studies” it is only for the advancement of men’s rights, when it reality it is critically interrogating men’s access to power and how it is utilized to keep women in a position of inferiority
 * If this is something that is stated in the source it needs to be clearly attributed to the person making the statement. Otherwise this comes across as original research, something that you came up with on your own. It's important to avoid making judgement calls on something, such as stating that something definitively does or doesn't do something - or that something is correct or incorrect - unless it's widely believed by the majority of authorities in the given field. Even then, saying that something is misunderstood, misleading, or inaccurate should almost always be avoided unless it's a direct quote or written extremely carefully, as it's easy for something like this to come across as not only original research but also coming from a specific stance on the topic.

A lot of this will just be fine tuning the work - I did some of it myself - so I hope this doesn't dishearten you! Let me know if there's anything I can help you with! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:07, 9 October 2019 (UTC)