User talk:Valerieantico
| This user is a student editor in Palm_Beach_State_College/Fundamentals_of_Speech_Communication_(Summer) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Valerieantico, 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.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Notes
[edit]Hi, I have some notes for your draft:
- Wikipedia is written in third person, so you should not use terms like "I, my, we, us, you" or similar.
- Make sure that you are only summarizing what has been explicitly stated in the source material and that any controversial or major claims or opinions are attributed to the person making them. If there are examples, the example should be in the source material. We can only summarize - we can't create our own opinions or research.
- Only capitalize things if they're something like a book title or the name of a person or place. Terms should generally not be capitalized unless they're always capitalized.
- I see that you mentioned a study in the draft. 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 person in one area may respond differently than one in an area located on the other side of the country. 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.
I've fixed the capitalization issue, so the main things to be careful of would be the other three things. As far as how to revise the content to better fit Wikipedia's writing style goes, here's a potential re-write of the first paragraph:
- The halo effect, also called the halo error, is a perception distortion that affects the way an individual interprets the information about another person with which they have formed a positive impression, or gestalt. The term refers to the tendency we have of evaluating an individual high on many traits because of a shared belief. In an example stated by This Person, a person who has a positive gestalt with another person may dismiss or justify negative behaviors or actions that they have done, as they are connect it with the positive gestalt.
I'm a little hesitant to put an example in the lead, as this is something that may be better in the main body of the article.
I think that you have good work here, it just needs to be revised to fit Wikipedia's style and format guidelines. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)