User talk:Jfer18

Welcome!
Hello, Jfer18, 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) 15:14, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

You have an overdue training assignment.
Please complete the assigned training modules. --Angang22 (talk) 21:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Copy and pasting
We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. See also Copy-paste. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please follow the directions at Donating copyrighted materials to grant license. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:35, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/generalized-anxiety-disorder/expert-answers/test-anxiety/faq-20058195

Sourcing
Hi! I was alerted that you added content to the article on ADHD and there were some concerns over this.

Firstly, the content was only sourced with a link to the website VeryWellMind. When it comes to editing on health and psychology related topics you should always be extremely cautious of whatever sources are used. You need to look carefully at what type of source it is. Here's a bit of a rundown of sourcing per WP:MEDRS:


 * Primary sources are written by people who were directly involved with the research in that they participated in the research in some form or fashion or they're documenting their own personal experiences. Studies would fall into this area, for example. They can also sometimes take a very specific look at a topic area, such as (for example) a study on minority children between a certain age range in a specific inner city area of New York City.
 * A secondary source summarizes something else, like a primary source or even other secondary sources. Per MEDRS, these sources usually "provide an overview of current understanding of the topic, to make recommendations, or to combine results of several studies". Literature reviews fall under this banner, as do systematic reviews found in medical journals, specialist academic or professional books, and medical guidelines or position statements published by major health organizations. Secondary sources can often take a broader look at a topic area, but not always.
 * Tertiary sources, per MEDRS, "usually summarizes a range of secondary sources. Undergraduate or graduate level textbooks, edited scientific books, lay scientific books, and encyclopedias are examples of tertiary sources." These typically take a very broad overview of a topic area.
 * Popular press sources are things like newspaper articles and can also include content on some websites. They're typically not seen as a reliable source for medical related content for the reasons detailed here. Essentially popular press websites are often more focused on getting people to click on and read their articles and can often ignore or even misrepresent some pretty vital reasons. They can sometimes be used, but should never be used as the only source for medical claims. To be honest, I'd recommend not using them at all for articles and instead focus on using things like peer reviewed journal articles or books released through authoritative sources, like a university press.

Per, the website you used isn't seen as a reliable source, which looks to be because it falls more into the realm of popular press than a good secondary source. It doesn't review existing literature and VeryWellMind isn't seen as a peer reviewed source or an expert body. We'd also have to be able to show where it is routinely seen as a reliable, reputable source by very reliable sources. If you're interested in continuing to edit on this or similar topics, I would like for you to take the training on editing medical and psychology topics.

Another issue with the section was that you added it to the lead as opposed to one of the subsections. Please be careful about this. Also, be careful of tone as you need to make sure that you're writing as neutrally as possible when it comes to health topics. (It's a good thing to do in general but because people can and do come to Wikipedia for information there's an extra need to be careful with how things are written and sourced.)

I hope that this helps - please let me know if you have any questions! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Something else to consider - I recommend talking to your college's librarian, as they can help introduce you to the database as well as help show you what sources would be considered most high quality. They have an option for you to chat with them via e-mail, text or a live chat, but I recommend going in person since it's easier to talk face to face in my experiences. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:24, 4 October 2018 (UTC)