User talk:Lowthel

Welcome!
Hello, Lowthel, 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) 14:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Response
Hi! I don't see where you were blocked from editing the page - however I do strongly recommend that you do not repost the content to the article. It's been removed twice by, so re-adding a third time would be counterproductive at this point. The best option here is to look and see what could have caused them to revert the page. I've pinged them here so they can add to this. Here are my notes, working from this version:


 * When you added to the article you removed the lead. Lead sections to articles tend to follow a specific format, so this was likely one of the reasons for the reversion.
 * I also noted that you didn't have sourcing throughout the section. It looks like you added sourcing to the first sentence after the date, but after that the paragraph was unsourced. When pulling from a specific source, make sure that you are careful to put that source after the claim. That way readers can tell what material came from which source and also verify the information. This was better in the damage section, but there were still large portions that were unsourced.

It looks like you were trying to translate the Spanish Wikipedia article - something to keep in mind here is that you can definitely do just a straightforward translation of the Spanish article. You don't have to re-write and summarize it in your own words, as Wikipedia's copyright allows it to be copied verbatim as long as you attribute it in the edit summary.

I hope this helps! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:06, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, quick note - the content was all reverted but no worries as you definitely didn't break Wikipedia! That's something that would be incredibly difficult to do! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Lowthel, you were quick to catch one of the problems when you re-posted the article. With that edit, you cleared up the reference parameter issue, and I thank you for that.


 * With that issue cleared, there were still glaring issues with the content and layout. Starting first with the content issues then. The content that you posted contradicted existing details. That is not going to help the readers understanding of the event. They will be confused. There needs to be just one narrative. Not two. Looking at this version of the article: see how the infobox details completely contradict the text in the body of the article?


 * Now with layout. All those fine details of the event were placed in the first paragraph of the article. Around here we call this the lead. The lead is an introductory paragraph that states the basic details that support the significance, impact, and legacy of the event. In your version, do you see how in that paragraph you went from 0 to 100 by discussion probability of error?. That sounds like a fine detail that should be discussed in its own section. Please preview those kinds of topics in the lead, then expand on them in the article. See MOS:LEAD for a better explanation of this. I'm just winging it.


 * So that's kind of it. The articles are meant to be read and understood, and if they can't be, they're useless. Take care, and please don't hesitate to ask me anything here or on my talk page. Dawnseeker2000  01:59, 23 February 2019 (UTC)