SuzanneZacharia

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, SuzanneZacharia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Emotional Freedom Technique. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Marek.69 ^talk 20:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Editorial opinions

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Emotional Freedom Techniques appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. The thing is, Wikipedia isn't a venue for us, as editors, to insert our own critiques of various studies and pieces of evidence. Material, whether factual or opinion, needs to be verifiably attributable to a reasonably reliable source. MastCell ^Talk 21:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Please read MastCell's comment carefully and digest it. Thank you. -- Hoary (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

You're not getting it.

If some authoritative source says that some study was defective, cite that source. If you think that a study published in an academic journal was defective, you may very well be right, and you're welcome to have your own paper on the matter published in an academic journal. But an article in Wikipedia is not the place to voice your dissatisfaction.

I strongly suggest that you leave the article alone for at least 24 hours. -- Hoary (talk) 14:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I have also removed the section. As it is not sourced to any reliable sources, then it has to be regarded as original research. Black Kite 15:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Edit-warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Emotional Freedom Techniques. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. MastCell ^Talk 06:10, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

I now understand the policies and will be gathering more information to prove my point the way I think I understand it should be done. And I will not edit more than 3 times in a 24-hour period.