![]() |
Hi there! Hseong2,
you are invited to The Co-op, a gathering place for editors where you can find mentors to help you build and improve Wikipedia. If you're looking for an editor who can help you out, please join us! I JethroBT (I'm a Co-op mentor)
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC) |
Thank you Kpark252 (talk) 19:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hseong2, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian 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 complete the student training, 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 Materials
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hseong2, and thank you for visiting the Teahouse. As requested I am responding here rather than there.
The first source should be just fine, as it was published in a scientific journal. The other two do not appear to have been published formally (though one states it was presented at a seminar) and are thus not ideal sources for a Wikipedia article. Neither of those two sources could establish notability for whatever topic you want to write an article about. Provided the facts in question were uncontroversial, however, I am of the opinion that the two sources not formally published would still be acceptable to cite in support of statements of fact. Note that other editors might disagree, and if that were to happen, consensus would have to be developed through discussion in order to decide whether the questionable sources should be kept or not. I hope this has been clear. Feel free to ask further questions either here or at the Teahouse; if you respond here, please copy and paste [[User:GrammarFascist|GrammarFascist]]
somewhere in your reply, so that Wikipedia will notify me of your response. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 13:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
((U|DESiegel))
or post to User talk:DESiegel if you want to ask me additional questions. DES (talk) 17:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC) @GrammarFascist: DES (talk) 17:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
SwisterTwister talk 08:22, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Threat and error management, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stress. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Dr. Kearns. Here is my final article: Threat and error management Hseong2 (talk) 19:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I have incorporated all the experts' advice (including yours). I would like to thank everyone who gave me constructive feedback on my article. I will always keep in mind that everybody reads and edits my article. I hope my work is a helpful guide to someone who wants to learn about aviation industry. Hseong2 (talk) 19:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!