User talk:Chemistmom

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Chemistmom, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Jeconiah have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Doug Weller talk 08:08, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit on Jeconiah because of not verifable?[edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with...

Hi, Doug. Thanks for the note about my edit to the Jeconiah article. I am puzzled as to why you think my post was not able to be verified?

I used a specific text of the Bible, and provided an external link to the verse in the main part of the article (II Chronicles 36:9-10), and also provided a specific year on the Babylonian Chronicle ABC 5, with a link to Jona Lendering's website with the translation of the ABC 5 in the main part of the text.

I then inserted a footnote to Jona Lendering's website, as footnote 17, I believe.

So, I think my statement in support of Thiele's reasoning that Jeconiah didn't leave for Babylon until the new year, or Nissan, is fully supported by external sources, and not my own research.

I put my edits in square brackets, to try to show that this was not Thiele's reasoning, but my reasoning to support his conclusions.

Can you please give me more information on why you are planning on removing my edits, based on them not being able to be verified?

For reference, here is a copy of my edit:

"[Thiele's conclusion can be supported by II Chronicles 36:9-10, which says the year was expired before Nebuchadnezzar brought Jehoiakin and the vessels from the Temple to Babylon. This means that the month Adar (when Nebuchadnezzar broke through the wall according to the Babylonian Chronicle ABC 5, entry for year seven, [17]) was finished, and Nissan had begun before they left.]"

Thanks so much,

Chemistmom (talk) 09:06, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those are not supported by reliable sources as OR is not allowed. KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 16:48, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've just posted a reply to you elsewhere, but yes, your reasoning is as KGirlTrucker8 says original research which is not allowed. Nor can you use WP:Primary sources such as religious texts this way. "Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so." Wikipedia can have a steep learning curve depending on what you edit. Doug Weller talk 14:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Doug Weller talk, It is certainly discouraging for me to try to edit Wikipedia articles, since I think everything I have tried has been reverted. Can you please explain to me why I cannot reference Bible verses, as you stated above, when in the article on Jeconiah I was trying to edit also quotes many Bible verses, and this is all right? I believe you will see many Bible verses used here as primary sources of information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeconiah I believe this statement is a synthesis and analysis by someone writing this passage in the Jeconiah article, also. Would you agree? The writer is citing two experts, and then disagrees with both of them. A specific Bible verse is also used in support of his dissent with the two experts. "But this hypothesis, like Thiele's, runs into difficulty with Ezekiel 40:1, since the 25th year of captivity would begin in Nisan of 573 and the fall of Jerusalem, 14 years earlier, would be in 587, not the 586 that Galil and Thiele advocate." It seems to me my addition follows the same format as this statement, which was not removed as original research or unsupported. My statement would clear up the controversy which is brought forth in this statement that has remained in the original article. I can't become a better editor, if I don't understand the rules, and it seems to me the rules are not applied equally. So, your help would be appreciated. I would respectfully request you revert this portion of the Jeconiah article, on the same basis as you reverted my comment. Thanks, Chemistmom (talk) 17:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]