User talk:JonathanInBoston

September 2017
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Jonathan Rotenberg has been reverted. Your edit here to Jonathan Rotenberg was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://hightechhistory.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/june-6-1981-the-day-i-met-steve-jobs/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks!

--XLinkBot (talk) 12:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Reply to your query on my page
Hi, Jonathan. My talkpage is a good place to communicate with me, the way you did, though questions about edits to the article are better put on article talk — Talk:Jews for Jesus. Experienced editors, of whom I am one, generally explain their edits in an edit summary, so that the reason is immediately visible. You can see all edits that have been made to Jews for Jesus, and all edit summaries, in the article history. Do you see my explanation there? Where I say "Undid revision 816811547 by JonathanInBoston. Please cite a reliable source for your change. Also, changing the word "Jewish" to "Christian" while leaving the link to Messianic Judaism doesn't make sense" ? I'll explain more fully below, because space is limited in an edit summary, and it was kind of laconic.
 * 1) It wasn't really because of my own opinion of the organization that I reverted your edit — I don't have much of an opinion — I'm not familiar with Jews for Jesus — I'm not even American. It was because you didn't provide a reliable secondary source. Please see our guideline Identifying reliable sources. You say "the article itself" is your source, and quote something you say the article says, about what leaders of "the four major Jewish movements" have said. No, that's not something the article says. (The text is pretty opinionated, so saying it in Wikipedia's voice would be highly unlikely.) It's a quote from something called "the Spiritual Deception Prevention Project", which frankly sounds like an opinion source to me, and which in its turn only gives snatches of quotations. You really can't just handwave at "the article" as your source: please find a reliable source per Identifying reliable sources — please read that guideline carefully before you change the article again. It's not important that you put in a source in a technically perfect way, btw — an experienced user can turn it into a neat footnote for you — just give a proper source, and people will help.
 * 2) There was nothing technically wrong with the way you wrote in the article, and your writing shows that you can see the article in edit mode. Please look now at the sentence you changed. The first link, just a few words in, renders on the page as Messianic Jewish, but in edit mode, it's a so-called piped link which reads Messianic Jewish . That mean it links to the article Messianic Judaism. So you changed "Messianic Jewish" to "Messianic Christian", but continued to link to "Messianic Judaism". I'm sorry, if you're unfamiliar with piped links that's probably bewildering, and please don't get hung up on it; it's not the important part; providing a reliable source is the important part.

But I also have another point, about the article Jonathan Rotenberg, which you have edited. You make it clear on my page that you are Jonathan Rotenberg. I'm afraid that means you ought not to be editing that article directly at all. Please see our guideline Autobiography, which explains why: "Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is an example of conflict of interest editing and is strongly discouraged. Editing a biography about yourself is acceptable only if you are removing unambiguous vandalism or clear-cut and serious violations of our biography of living persons policy." But you should find the whole guideline illuminating; please read it. If you want to make changes to your biography other than removing vandalism or policy violations, please suggest those changes on the talkpage (with a reliable secondary source), and another editor will add them for you. At least, I hope so; we're all volunteers. But I'll try to keep an eye on the talkpage myself. Incidentally, there are some pretty poor sources in the article now, and some promotional marketing-speak language. If you look at it now, you'll see that I've tagged a couple of sources as needing improvement, and removed one altogether. (A dead link to dropbox is about as far from a reliable source as you can get.) I did that before you contacted me, in fact. You can help by making suggestions for improvements of those aspects on the talkpage. Happy editing! Bishonen &#124; talk 23:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC).