User talk:Sailorbo

Welcome!
Hello, Sailorbo, 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) 14:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You have an overdue training assignment.
Please complete the assigned training modules. --Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

You have an overdue training assignment.
Please complete the assigned training modules. --Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Electronic cigarette
Hi, I wanted to give you a head's up about the electronic cigarette article. This is an article that is more heavily watched on Wikipedia because it's a topic area that has been met with controversy and debate, some of which should be on Wikipedia and some that should not. As such, you need to make sure that any content you add uses the strongest possible sourcing and is written as neutrally as possible. Remember - we can only summarize what has been explicitly stated in source materials. If the content is removed (as it was removed by ) you must discuss the edits before re-adding anything to the page.

I did want to give some explanation to the removal. It looks like there were two major issues with the addition.


 * The first is that you used a study to back up the claims in the article. Studies should generally be avoided unless they're accompanied with a secondary source that reviews the study or comments upon the specific claim that is being stated. The reason for this is that studies are primary sources for any of the claims and research conducted by their authors. The publishers don't provide any commentary or in-depth verification, as they only check to ensure that the study doesn't have any glaring errors that would invalidate it immediately. Study findings also tend to be only true for the specific people or subjects that were studied. For example, a Spanish speaking American may respond differently than an English speaking American, as could someone from another country or background. Socioeconomic factors (be they for the person or a family member) also play a large role, among other things that can impact a response. As such, it's definitely important to find a secondary source, as they can provide this context, verification, and commentary. Aside from that, there's also the issue of why a specific study should be highlighted over another. For example, someone could ask why one study was chosen as opposed to something that studied a similar topic or had different results.


 * The second is that it looks like what you added wasn't what the source actually stated/claimed. When summarizing sources, you need to make sure that you are extremely careful to ensure that what you add is accurate to the source material. For example, you stated that dual users had a statistically significant increase of smoked per day in the median number of cigarettes smoked in comparison to traditional cigarette only users. The word 'increase' implies that they (dual users) smoked more than they did previously, which isn't what the source stated - the study wrote that the participants reported a higher amount, which is a different thing as this would be what they smoke on average as opposed to any true increase. However as this is a study, this shouldn't be mentioned in the article unless we have secondary sourcing to justify mentioning it.

Since this content also delved into the area of health and wellness, I would like for you to take this training module on editing medical and health topics before editing further in this topic area, thanks. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:21, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I just finished updating another nicotine-related article. I make mass changes and use the best sources. I and others are working on updating the entire e-cig article. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QuackGuru/Sand3 I work on updating all the e-cig pages. QuackGuru ( talk ) 19:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Sailorbo - since it looks like there's a concentrated effort underway to improve the e-cig article, it may be a good idea to edit on a different topic. With things like this, especially as the article is a controversial topic area and a health related topic, this can make it very difficult to make edits that will remain in the article. It doesn't mean that you can't add good material, just that this is a harder area to edit than others. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)