User talk:HolyOil

Welcome!
Hello, HolyOil, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Evangelical Anglican Church In America does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! —Guanaco 22:28, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Help me!
Hello

I am a University Professor with a great deal of experience editing research and similar manuscripts. I am told that I have violated your NPOV policy, but cant see where. Please point out the offending sentences/paragraphs and I will amend it?

Prof. Ashley G. Frank, DCom, MBA Please help me with...

HolyOil (talk) 22:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, I've been patrolling recent changes, mostly dealing with vandalism and edits blatantly violating NPOV, far beyond anything you've contributed. Your work on the article is welcome, but it seems like you're writing from the perspective of the church itself instead of a neutral observer. In particular the sentence "Its unbroken chain of apostolic succession has been faithfully preserved." raises some red flags with me, but this isn't my area of expertise. The apostolic succession article treats it as something which is claimed by churches, rather than a definitive achievement.


 * Overall I'm happy to see you helping with Wikipedia and I didn't mean to discourage you. I hope you keep it up, and I'm sure you'll do fine if you keep the NPOV policy in mind. If other editors have specific concerns, they'll let you know. —Guanaco 22:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I would expect that, as a university professor, you're well aware of what kinds of sources are reliable. Accepting their own website as the sole source for such claims as having "faithfully preserved" apostolic succession doesn't seem like academic rigor to me; is that the standard you'd apply when writing a paper for publication in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal? Other parts of the content you wrote cited no references at all but the Bible; the last time I read the KJV, it didn't have anything to say about the Evangelical Anglican Church In America. Thus to me it seems you were mostly summarizing what the EACA has to say about itself, not what independent sources have reported about it; that indeed is not the way to write a neutral encyclopedia article. Huon (talk) 02:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello HolyOil, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Evangelical Anglican Church In America have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2017 (UTC)