User talk:Jbohey
| This user is a student editor in UCSD/Introduction_to_Policy_Analysis_(Winter) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Jbohey, 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) 14:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Sustainable diet
[edit]Hi, I wanted to let you know that I had to remove the content you added to sustainable diet. There are a few reasons for this:
- This was written from a very specific viewpoint, that eating a meat intensive diet is unsustainable. The issue with this is that Wikipedia articles should not take a specific outlook on an article topic, as this makes the content non-neutral. It also comes across as a single person arguing a particular viewpoint as opposed to the content being like it was not written by a single person.
- A better way to approach this would be to approach it as a section on meat diets in general. The section would include information on how scientists and researchers view meat diets, as well as evidence for or against meat diets being sustainable. Keep in mind that there are different levels of meat intake with diets, so the section should reflect on that. The number one thing, however, is that the section should be balanced and should not come across as endorsing a single viewpoint.
- When writing, avoid using the "we" and "our" wording since this also comes across as one person writing the work.
- The sourcing needed some work. Sourcing like this and this are good - they're written by scholars and published by a reliable publisher. However you also used the websites for the documentaries Cowspiracy and Before the Flood, which pose issues of verification and neutrality of the sourcing. Essentially, documentaries are often written to entertain and to argue a specific viewpoint. Some are more neutral than others but most aren't. Cowspiracy is one that especially has an issue with neutrality and there have been scientists that have argued for and against their claims. As such, I would especially not use Cowspiracy as a source for the article. Subject matter like sustainability should definitely use scholarly and academic sources, as it delves into the realm of science and also potentially health.
I wanted to let you know why it was removed. I hope that this can help you with the section. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)