Nsjlcuwdbcc

Introduction

Hello! I'm Ash, and this is my attempt at introducing myself via Wikipedia talk pages. I am presently a third year cognitive science and data science double major. I like to draw, write, read, listen to and play music. Recently I've been reading a lot of books in my spare time and some people say one of the best ways to get to know a person is by looking at their bookshelf, so here's some of my recent favorite readings:

Dune - really interesting sci-fi story that pivots away from a lot of sci-fi tropes. A lot of it is about humanity, time, politics and the problems of a messiah complex. It's not for everybody but I personally found its philosophies very interesting.

Discworld Series - probably best described as a fantasy version of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. There's a lot of satire, complex one-dimensional characters and a nonsensical world strikingly similar to the one we live in today. I honestly think Sir Terry Pratchett was on a different level than many other writers.

Count of Monte-Cristo- one of the classics, I think this book is the pinnacle of the French Romanticism, for better or worse. It's a pure revenge story, with a prison escape and complex plots and sabotage and numerous mentions of weed. It's so inherently cheesy and cliche, but the book plays it so earnestly and well that it's hard not to just go with it.

--QuixoticWindmills (talk) 07:31, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Greetings from King666Field

Hey! I'm King666Field and nice to meet you on your talk page! I'm excited to be a Wikipedia editor in the future. King666Field (talk) 01:36, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Nsjlcuwdbcc, 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
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
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) 19:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Drafts

Hi! With drafts, always make sure that you do not move the drafts live until they're ready. Thanks! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

So sorry about that! I'll pay attention to that next time!!Nsjlcuwdbcc (talk) 16:16, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

• Hi! The admin was very nice and the draft is now back in your sandbox. Make sure that you don't move your work live until the article is completed! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for doing this! I'll make sure to avoid making the same mistake again! :)

• I hope you are aware that you have User:Nsjlcuwdbcc/spatial cloaking as well as User:Nsjlcuwdbcc/sandbox. You are liable to confuse yourself if you work on the subject of spatial cloaking in two places. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:12, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for willing to restore the draft! I really appreciate it. Also, I'll remember to double check before moving the complete draft to any article. Thank you!

New Page Unreferenced

Concerning your new page Spatial cloaking

Thank you for your recent contributions. Getting started creating new articles on Wikipedia can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft of your article in draftspace or in your userspace first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, with less risk of deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Thank you.

Notes

Hi! Here are my promised notes! As I said via the email, I've moved a copy to User:Nsjlcuwdbcc/spatial cloaking so it's easier for me to picture what it will look like when it's done and see what still needs to be done, as the article draft is quite large.

• The first thing I looked at was the sourcing. I noticed that some of them are primary sources like studies or someone announcing their work. Be extremely careful with any primary sources. 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. This is a writeup of studies, but it also applies to any research article that has someone announcing something they created.

Also be cautious with ResearchGate sourcing. It's definitely an amazing site where people can share their work that has already been published elsewhere like academic and scholarly journals, but there is also work on there that is self-published, meaning that it was never published anywhere but ResearchGate. The site doesn't review the work for accuracy or even to ensure that there are no holes in the work's logic, so the self-published works aren't usable as a reliable source. You also want to make sure that you're getting the full citation for the work as well.

• Something else that you really want to be careful of is that you are only summarizing what is explicitly stated in the source material. I'm concerned that this article contains material where you draw your own conclusions based on the source material, even if this conclusion isn't actually in the source itself. This is considered to be original research and should be avoided.

• This has some issues with grammar, mostly through typos and the like, so make sure that you review it thoroughly. Something I can recommend is getting someone else to check it over for you - it's what I like to do if I have people available. Some of the other things in this vein to watch out for is repeating sentences with the same wording. One instance of this was in the background section, where you use "for example" fairly close together. It's honestly pretty easy to do and this is something I'm constantly catching myself on, both during writing and after. A good option for this is to change it up a little by using something like "An example cited by This Person put forth..." or something along those lines.

• Be careful with writing in that you don't fall into a research paper format. Some of the layout for this comes across strongly in this regard, such as labeling one section evaluation. Original research also falls into this area, since that's something that should be in a good research paper. Tone should also be watched. Make sure that you're not writing from a persuasive viewpoint.

What I would recommend is that you look at articles for similar topics, or similar enough to where you could get an idea of what the layout should look like. I'm not entirely sure if these are really similar enough as far as very general topic areas go, but good articles to review in general are Parallel computing, Ransomware, Internet privacy, Mass surveillance in the United States, and Big data.

I hope this helps you out! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tortious interference, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Breaking (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 12:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for creating State privacy laws of the United States

Thanks for creating State privacy laws of the United States, which I have now reviewed and accepted.

The article is clearly a good foundation about a notable topic; thank you all very much for your work. If you would like to improve the article further, it may be useful to convert some tables to actual article sentences, or to add text to the pure tables.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk Page Introduction Assignment

Hello, I hope your semester has gotten off to a good start! I'm really excited to work with other people of this project and see what everyone has accomplished at the end. Best of luck with the project and life in general! --GoatCheesePizza (talk) 04:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, just adding my intro for the week 1 assignment. I am excited to work on this project with everyone! Oakv17 (talk) 06:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)