User talk:Royo322 Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Royo322


Hello, Royo322, 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.

Additional Resources
  • You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi! I have some notes on your draft:

  • I'm concerned that there is some original research in the article. On Wikipedia we can only summarize what has already stated in reliable sources - we can't create new conclusions or synthesize new theories that are based on the material. Also avoid things like "If.. then.." statements and phrases like "it seems", since those come across as original research and also persuasive arguments to get readers to see the material in a certain way. This is probably one of the things that is the biggest difference from writing for academia and for Wikipedia, as these are things that would otherwise be innocuous elsewhere.
  • The sourcing looks very good, so I want to commend you on that - I love that you used the school databases! Well done! Just be careful of studies, as they're primary sources, so they need some secondary sources to help back up the claims and show how the study's data applies to a wider context. (Studies are pretty limited in their scope out of necessity, so they don't look at the entirety of a population or group of people - only the part of the population that they were able to survey.)

I'm not entirely sure where this is going to go, otherwise I could give a little more detailed notes, so I hope that these notes help! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]


It looks like you tried to move your draft live, but just moved it into another userpage. However I did want to note that there are some issues with the page, so it's good it wasn't made live yet.

This still has a massive issue with original research and coming across as a reflective essay on the topic. It also has wording like "of course", which should only be used in an essay as those come across like they're being written from the viewpoint of a specific person and towards a specific audience. This page on words that lack precision covers types of words to avoid. Also, while the sourcing is generally OK, be careful of relying too heavily on popular press for major points. They're not always as accurate or neutral as they should be, even the publications that are pretty well thought of. This doesn't mean that you can't use them, just that it's best to try to find the strongest possible source and in some cases, find sources that help back up the points in the source material. While this isn't a medical topic, the guidelines at this section go over some of the issues with popular press sourcing.

You also use studies to back up claims, which is an issue because these are primary sources for the claims and research conducted by the study's authors. There are many reasons why this poses an issue, one of which being that the study's findings are going to be necessarily limited because they will only have the time, funding, and staff to review a relatively small slice of the population and topic area they're looking to study. Secondary sources help put this data into wider context and also help verify the findings in their own way, as the outlets that publish the studies only look to make sure that the study doesn't have any major issues with their work that would invalidate it. While again, not a medical topic, this training module will give further explanation about this. Essentially, you can use studies but they must be accompanied by secondary sources that cover the study and provide commentary and context.

Finally, there's the concern that this would be redundant to the existing article on the European migrant crisis, as that article should cover things like impact. This is definitely something that will need to be addressed.

I hope that this all helps - let me know if you have any questions. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]