User talk:Hprmartins

Welcome!
Hello, Hprmartins, 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) 14:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Transgender youth
Hprmartins, thanks for your contribution to Transgender youth. Unfortunately, it was undone, because it didn't meet Wikipedia's standard of verifiability. I noticed you attempted to add a citation, so it's good you tried; however, it didn't contain the minimum information (Journal name, author, article title, date) to determine what source you actually used. In addition, the  parameter, which you did include, is a private url usable only by students and faculty at New England College, and so is not appropriate for a reference url at Wikipedia, which can be viewed by anyone around the world. If your private, NEC url points to a JStor resource, please use the JStor stable url, instead of the internal-only NEC url. Hope this helps.

Please don't hesitate to contact me here, or on my Talk page, if you have any questions. Mathglot (talk) 11:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I also wanted to add that you should only mark an edit as minor if the edit is very small and minor, like fixing a spelling or grammatical error - something that people are unlikely to have any issue or input on. Any large contributions or ones that could be contested, like adding to the article, should not be marked as minor.
 * Also, when writing stuff like "it is said", make sure to specify who is stating this such as "According to So-and-so..." or "In a 2015 article This Person wrote that This Group Of People have stated that...". ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡)  14:17, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi! Sorry - that is me, I forgot to switch accounts. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

United States Foreign Aid
Hi! I've reverted your contribution to the article for a few reasons:

The first is that the contribution had some issues with tone and original research. For example, the section comes across as very against the budget cut as opposed to being neutral. While the argument is very empathetic and humanistic, content should not be written as slanted towards a specific side. Also, while many would likely agree with the statement that cutting the budget would have been catastrophic, this is a claim that needs to be extremely well sourced and attributed, as otherwise this comes across as claims that you are personally making. This leads into the second point:

The content is only sourced with a single news article by The Economist. While this site is considered to be a reliable source, a section like this is going to need many more sources to back up the claims, not only because these are major claims but also because anything that has to do with the Trump administration is considered to be pretty controversial. Also, be careful of news media sources as they may not always be the best possible sources for claims. Academic and scholarly sources is typically a safer bet here because they undergo a pretty vigorous process and are more likely to be written by people who are authorities on the subject matter. This isn't meant to zing the journalist, it's just that journalists cover a wide variety of topics and aren't always an expert on what they're covering. (In other words, they know about the topic well enough to report on it in a news atmosphere but they may not know as much about the overall history, policies, and whatnot as a scholar in the field would.) In situations like this it can be difficult to find academic sources since they may not have been published yet, so it becomes more important to ensure that there's a good depth of coverage and that the material is written and attributed.

That said, I think that this is an excellent idea for an addition and one that I highly encourage that you continue to work on. It's actually kind of surprising that this isn't in the article already, so this was a good catch! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)