![]() | This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that anyone can edit.[ citation needed] The information in this encyclopedia is therefore not always reliable, and since we don't know which information is reliable, we should regard all of its information as unreliable. [1]
Improving the reliability of wikipedia as a source can be achieved by citing sources and linking to external sources that contain more information about the subject. Here we discuss the reliability and appropriateness of all links to sources, i.e. links to every form of data either contained on mediawiki sources, A other online sources, or to non-online sources (books, magazines).
Throughout this document, links are any form of pointer that relate a statement to a source not contained in the same document, internal links are links to documents within mediawiki, links that contain a hyperlink to the external source are called external links. (needs clarification)
The document contains generic references (which do not lead anywhere), all formatted as ref. External links which are meant as an example link to http://www.example.org.
With regard to links to external information we have several policies and guidelines that (in whole or in part) discuss linking to sources:
Links should never be meant to tunnel people away from the wikipedia. This means that proper use of links is:
Although wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, information on external links would not be available in CD and paper versions of the wikipedia. People who do not have an internet connection would be void of this information. This again argues for including information in the wikipedia and refer to reliable sources when necessery. That means that information in the wikipedia is reliable, and that the information can be verified (though that should not be necessary).
Links to sources can take several forms:
The statement "grass is green" (in the document grass) does not need a reference for the color green, that is covered by the internal link. The statement could/should have a link to a source that proves that grass is generally green. That information should be provided by an external source.
Many statements in the text of a document need to be attributed. This means that a link has to be provided to a resource which can be used to verify the information in that statement. The reference in general directly follows the statement, thus (on the article grass): "Grass is green. ref", not "Grass is green. More information on the colour of grass can be found here." B
Resources that provide a broader overview, or provide information that can not be included into an article is often encountered in further reading or external links sections.
In cases where sources are unique, a link to that unique resource should be provided. This can be done without or with a hyperlink to the document:
Both uniquely identify the document one is referring to.
Other language rules: External links policy on DE wikipedia
Ways of adding:
One of the big problems of the wikipedia is spam. This is mainly the addition of links to external sources to sell products, but can also be a good-faith addition of a link to a number wikipedia documents.
Different forms of spam:
This will in the beginning lead to documents which were earlier FA or GA-status being degraded to only A or B class, but in the end it will result in a wikipedia that is more reliable.
![]() | This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that anyone can edit.[ citation needed] The information in this encyclopedia is therefore not always reliable, and since we don't know which information is reliable, we should regard all of its information as unreliable. [1]
Improving the reliability of wikipedia as a source can be achieved by citing sources and linking to external sources that contain more information about the subject. Here we discuss the reliability and appropriateness of all links to sources, i.e. links to every form of data either contained on mediawiki sources, A other online sources, or to non-online sources (books, magazines).
Throughout this document, links are any form of pointer that relate a statement to a source not contained in the same document, internal links are links to documents within mediawiki, links that contain a hyperlink to the external source are called external links. (needs clarification)
The document contains generic references (which do not lead anywhere), all formatted as ref. External links which are meant as an example link to http://www.example.org.
With regard to links to external information we have several policies and guidelines that (in whole or in part) discuss linking to sources:
Links should never be meant to tunnel people away from the wikipedia. This means that proper use of links is:
Although wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, information on external links would not be available in CD and paper versions of the wikipedia. People who do not have an internet connection would be void of this information. This again argues for including information in the wikipedia and refer to reliable sources when necessery. That means that information in the wikipedia is reliable, and that the information can be verified (though that should not be necessary).
Links to sources can take several forms:
The statement "grass is green" (in the document grass) does not need a reference for the color green, that is covered by the internal link. The statement could/should have a link to a source that proves that grass is generally green. That information should be provided by an external source.
Many statements in the text of a document need to be attributed. This means that a link has to be provided to a resource which can be used to verify the information in that statement. The reference in general directly follows the statement, thus (on the article grass): "Grass is green. ref", not "Grass is green. More information on the colour of grass can be found here." B
Resources that provide a broader overview, or provide information that can not be included into an article is often encountered in further reading or external links sections.
In cases where sources are unique, a link to that unique resource should be provided. This can be done without or with a hyperlink to the document:
Both uniquely identify the document one is referring to.
Other language rules: External links policy on DE wikipedia
Ways of adding:
One of the big problems of the wikipedia is spam. This is mainly the addition of links to external sources to sell products, but can also be a good-faith addition of a link to a number wikipedia documents.
Different forms of spam:
This will in the beginning lead to documents which were earlier FA or GA-status being degraded to only A or B class, but in the end it will result in a wikipedia that is more reliable.