User talk:MadelineDeLeo

Welcome!
Hello, MadelineDeLeo, 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) 15:42, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Sourcing Policies
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We hope you enjoy editing here and decide to stay. Unfortunately, two of your recent edits didn't meet Wikipedia policies about citations. Don't worry -- we have a lot of policies, and nobody follows them all perfectly from the beginning. For the future, though, I thought I'd explain one principle that will help keep your edits from being reverted.

On Wikipedia, we try to use reliable sources, or what we sometimes call WP:RS, to verify claims made in articles. One of the principles for decided what kind of sources to use is that we usually don't rely on internet blogs (WP:BLOGS) or self-published books WP:SPS to verify claims, because anyone can start a blog or self-publish a book without any way to verify that what they're saying is true. In particular, books that are published by Lulu.com are self-published.

Thanks again for taking the time to edit. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on my talk page (or on this page, if you're asking in the next couple days). Alephb (talk) 20:21, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review by Maddie DeLeo
In the lead section is it all one giant quote from that source? If so I think summarizing it into your own words might be better, I don't think it is very "Wikipedia like" to just have one giant quote as the lead section. It is a good quote though! It would just be better in your own words. For the next section, History of Digital Divide in the Philippines, I think you should take out the "Digital Divide" part in the title and just have it as the "History of the Philippines" because that is what it seems like it is, rather than about the digital divide. I like the topic of employment but I think that the sentence "Once you lose you job, it becomes harder to provide for your family, and then it is just an all around struggle" may need to be rewritten so it sounds more official and academic like. I think a good idea for the Politics and Culture section would be to provide a link to the "SprintLink" that is mentioned, if there is one, so readers can know what that is if they don't already. Also maybe for the "presidential election of Estrada" or just Estrada or the "Neitzenship" word you have used. Just suggestions! I'm not sure if they have Wikipedia articles for these topics. The education section is good! It's going to need its sources mixed in like the other sections and the formatting doesn't match but those are easily fixed! Overall I think this is a good article! -- MadelineDeLeo (talk) 19:35, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have been asked to restore the above. So here it is. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:21, 30 October 2017 (UTC)