Mauricio Perez Gonzalez

Welcome!

Hello, Mauricio Perez Gonzalez, 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) 16:33, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Food power

Hi! I wanted to give you some notes and a bit of a head's up. The head's up with the article is that it's of Good Article status, which means that it may be more heavily watched than the average article. This means that there's more of an emphasis of ensuring that the content is of very good quality when you add it to the article and that it uses good sourcing that explicitly states the claims summarized. Content is more likely to be reverted in Good Articles and if this happens, it's important that you discuss the removal on the talk page of the article or the user that removed the content. That said, I've removed the content for the time being since there are some things you need to fix - I didn't want to leave it up since I figured that it would be easier to re-add later if I'd removed it rather than leaving it up.

Now as far as the notes goes, I'm concerned that the tone is too casual at points and that there isn't enough sourcing in the section you created. For example, it's important to avoid any subjective terms, such as saying that something or someone does a great job. Even the word "thanks" can come across as a bit subjective at times, since the word implies positive connotations. I've switched this up with the word "due" since it gets the same gist across but a little neutrally.

With citations, it's important that the content be backed up with sourcing that explicitly states the claims made. For example, the Food Index only supplies numbers - it doesn't contain information about the country's past or anything like that. These are things that would absolutely need to have sourcing to back up, otherwise they would be seen as original research. Now the sentence "It's not a secret how European countries worry about what their inhabitants put in their bodies, providing the people with a healthy menu." is definitely going to be seen as too casual and also would be seen as original research to a degree, since it's assuming something of the inhabitants without providing a source that specifically states this.

Also, keep in mind that some of this feels a little general in that at times it seems to be more about the exports of the given country rather than its food power per se. With discussing exports, it would be good to have information about how those specific exports add to the country's food power - or subtract from it. For example, does it give them more power over another country by saying "agree to this or we won't export our product to you" - especially if the export is unique to and difficult to grow outside of their country?

I hope this all helps - definitely let me know on my talk page if I can help you with anything. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)