Foxx Molinari

Welcome!

Hello, Foxx Molinari, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Hey. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! DAJF (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello. My Name is Daniel, I am in ENG 1101 as well. My major is Mechanical Engineering.Mooddan2 (talk) 04:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, Foxx Molinari, 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) 17:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Witchcraft Peer Review

The introduction is clear and precise I don’t see any changes that need to be made there. The excessive content of this article has impressed me, there is a ton of material that witchcraft covers. It is hard to define witchcraft as it involves so many different topics. Only suggestions I have are to make any improvements possible from the content already provided, maybe find some fresh new sources. After seeing this article, it has inspired me to add new content to my article. Coovmich (talk) 04:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Witchcraft section in sandbox

Hi! I wanted to leave you some feedback on the section you have in your sandbox. Be extremely careful when writing out claims and with things of this nature you should try to have a lot of good, solid academic sources.

The main thing I want to caution you about is that you've made a lot of sentences that state things as an absolute fact, based on only one source. For instance, I would avoid saying that fiction media such as Harry Potter are absolutely the reason for an increase of young followers in Neo-Pagan religions because someone could counter that and say that the reason for the increased growth is an increased tolerance of other religions. In other words, that media raises awareness but the real reason is that it's more OK nowadays for people to try out and research non-Christian religions, which in turn leads to more media portrayals of witchcraft where witches are multi-faceted and sympathetic individuals rather than Satanists or cartoon cutouts like Samantha from Bewitched. To sum it up in a TL;DNR sentence, some believe that increased tolerance leads to more practitioners, which in turn leads to more sympathetic and realistic portrayals in the media.

You also need to be careful of using words and sentences that could be seen as a WP:POV or opinion statement, such as "Young women are empowered by the Wiccan literature through the, omit comma although fictional, lively portrayals." It may not be meant as an opinion statement and in this case it looks to have been based on the source material, but you need to be careful to show that this is a claim that was made by the source itself. For example, you can re-write this as something like "According to academic Jane Smith, this increase has made it easier for young women to find portrayals of strong, empowered female characters in witchcraft related media." You don't always have to list the name - the key is to make sure that it's phrased in a way that makes it clear that it's not a definitive statement like "the sky is blue" but rather a claim that came from a specific person or group. It can honestly be a little tricky at times. You did this very well with the sentence "Reclaiming Witches of San Francisco is argued to be the second wave of feminism that have been redefined as a religious movement as well." - that was written perfectly.

You need more sourcing, but you have an excellent start here and the sourcing you have so far is good. I don't want you to think that I didn't like the section - you've clearly done some hard work and it shows, it's just that religious themed topics can be difficult to write about because so much of it is relative to the person who wrote the source, so to speak. You're doing well so far, though. :) Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• It looks like the addition was removed when you added it to the main article on witchcraft - I can help you with re-writes if you like. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:06, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

so what seems to be the problem? Foxx Molinari (talk) 18:49, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

• It looks like Elmidae has helped work out the issues. Thanks to both of you!! You two make a good team! :) Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Good job on the teamwork for the witchcraft article! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)