User talk:Hmr005

This user is a student editor in Aquinas_College/GE203_-_Question_Everything_(Fall_2021) .

Hmr005, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Hmr005! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Hmr005, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; 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.

Handouts
Editing Wikipedia, a guide for student editors Choosing an article to edit Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions in our FAQ.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:20, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback[edit]

Hi. I'm not sure that a detailed methodology is really appropriate for the article. A Wikipedia article should summarize what secondary sources say about something - if people want to get the details of their methodology, they should really get it from the site itself. Think about how to summarize things so that a person who doesn't know anything about the topic can spend a few minutes reading and come away with a better understanding.

The other issue is that you shouldn't try to use a primary source (the website itself) to rebut reliable secondary sources. CJR and Poynter are very high quality sources here. On the other hand, the Hoover Institute is a source you should treat carefully. There's nothing wrong with citing think tanks as part of a partisan debate, but you should always attribute their opinions carefully and don't state what they have to say as simple facts, don't state things in Wikipedia's voice (e.g., "the sky is blue" can be said in Wikipedia's voice, while "the media is biased" needs an "according to..."). Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for your help! Hmr005 (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]