Tytedford20
| This user is a student editor in State_University_of_New_York,_Plattsburgh/Communication_and_Culture_(Spring_2019) . |
Welcome!
editHello, Tytedford20, 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) 15:54, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Sex scandal
editHi, I saw that you added the following content to the sex scandal article:
- In recent years there have been a large up take in the coming forward about sexual alligations with powerful public figures. For instance many celebrities including, Morgan Freemen, Danny Masterson, Connor McGregor, Tom Brokaw, Bret Kavanaugh and many more. The increase of accusations in recent years about incidents that happened years ago could very well be the result of the current social climate and convention being built around a general equality, social responsibility, and being over all more accountable. The general public is less driven by colonial values, thus not allowing men in power to get away with certain types of sexually aggressive or offensive behavior. (http://time.com/5015204/harvey-weinstein-scandal/) That is a list of some of the more well known public figures that have been brought to light amongst this mass outing of sexual incidents that have happened in the past. (Robert Sherwin & Sherry Corbett (1985) Campus sexual norms and dating relationships: A trend analysis, The Journal of Sex Research, 21:3, 258-274, DOI: 10.1080/00224498509551266)
- If you give that article a read it will touch on the idea that the social climate has changed over the years and thus women or anyone really can feel comfortable enough and feel the obligation to out someone for inappropriate behavior against them, and making that the correct thought process in our current social climate.
One of the first issues with this is that the content was added to the "see also" section, meaning that it was put in the wrong place. Another issue is that this was written in more of a questioning, probing fashion, where the writing style is asking questions of the readers while also creating new theories and guiding readers. We can only summarize what is explicitly stated in source materials. Another issue is that you instructed readers to go to an outside source - the writing should not do this. You also used a study as a source.
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 student in a very liberal school and area would likely respond far differently than a student in a conservative one in the United States. This also isn't taking into account the differences between students in various countries and what those countries would see as liberal or conservative. 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.
I've removed this from the article for these reasons. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2019 (UTC)