User talk:Paddyiranmanesh

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

Response
Hi! Do you have Visual Editor enabled? If not, enable it via these instructions.

To add a citation, follow the directions here. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Response and notes
Hi! The tag you saw basically means that there's a tag for a reference, but there's no actual reference there. It can sometimes happen if the source isn't in the body of the article and copied over properly.

However I do have some notes about your additions, which were reverted by, as you added content to a disambiguation page. Pages like these aren't meant to have substantial article content in them, as they serve as more of a listing of articles that have the word "apology" in their title.


 * There are some statements that were written fairly subjectively, the first being the statement "Apologies bring closure for individuals". The issue here is that this is highly, highly dependent on the individuals in question and the situation, as well as the idea of closure. It's very important to avoid making statements like this, especially with articles on topics like apologies. Keep in mind that there are a lot of apology types and not all of them will actually make anyone feel better.


 * Make sure that you clearly attribute anything that could be seen as an opinion or subjective statement.


 * It looks like you have only used studies as sources and used them to back up claims. Studies are primary sources for any of the research and claims created by its authors and that in order to use the study, you will need to have an independent, reliable secondary source that covers the study and backs it up. There are multiple reasons for why this is necessary.
 * The first is that studies can sometimes be faulty and the secondary source will help validate it, as the secondary source's author will have reviewed the material and provide commentary on the work. Keep in mind that simply getting published isn't a sign that the information is all correct - the journal only reviews the work to ensure that there's no obvious issues or errors that immediately invalidate the study and don't recreate or validate the study.
 * Studies are limited out of necessity, so a secondary source helps provide wider context. Studies are typically conducted with a relatively few people (in comparison to the entire population) and as such, the answers are really only applicable for those specific participants. There are a lot of ways people differ and things like location, culture, income, race, and even personal backgrounds will impact how they respond to any study questions or tasks. For example, someone in California may answer differently than someone in say, Virginia or Florida to the question of apologies, as would someone who had a negative experience with an apology as opposed to someone with a good experience. This is why the secondary source is so important.
 * A third reason is that the secondary source helps show how this specific study is major enough to reference in an article. In the past there have been issues (in general, not specifically with students) with people cherry picking studies that back up a specific viewpoint or opinion and using them to sway an article in whatever direction they want. This was especially an issue when you had people picking obscure studies that were ignored (and sometimes proven to be faulty) over studies that were frequently referenced and validated in secondary sources.
 * This is something that you may not have necessarily known about as far as studies go, so I'd like for you to take this training module. It not only covers the information about studies as sources but it also covers ways to edit articles that fall into the realm of health and psychology, which the topic of apologies does - or at least brushes up against.

I've done a little bit of tweaking to the draft in your sandbox and gave you a bit of a sample re-write for how the lead should look. What you have here isn't absolutely terrible, but it does need to better fit Wikipedia's writing style and it needs non-primary sources to back up the claims. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Shalor! Paddy 17:14, 27 February 2019 (UTC)