Wikipedia
|
Hi there! Leave comments for me on my discussion page. If you are new to Wikipedia, you cannot go wrong by reading
WP:NPOV,
WP:RS, and
WP:VERIFY.
Just because you can link to it doesn’t mean it’s a reliable published source. Some things which are not reliable sources according to that policy:
Related is the prohibition on no original research. If you do not use a reliable source then you are conducting original research by definition. Original research includes “unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, and ideas; or any new interpretation, analysis, or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, or arguments that appears to advance a position.” A good rule of thumb:
The guidelines says that editors should completely exclude anything that “introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source.”
Wikipedia is not a repository of opinion. It is an encyclopedia.
If an article addresses specific living persons (their thoughts, actions) the burden of proof is higher. The founder of Wikipedia writes:
The guidelines make it clear that this is not limited to biographical articles, it applies to all articles.
Wikipedia
|
Hi there! Leave comments for me on my discussion page. If you are new to Wikipedia, you cannot go wrong by reading
WP:NPOV,
WP:RS, and
WP:VERIFY.
Just because you can link to it doesn’t mean it’s a reliable published source. Some things which are not reliable sources according to that policy:
Related is the prohibition on no original research. If you do not use a reliable source then you are conducting original research by definition. Original research includes “unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, and ideas; or any new interpretation, analysis, or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, or arguments that appears to advance a position.” A good rule of thumb:
The guidelines says that editors should completely exclude anything that “introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source.”
Wikipedia is not a repository of opinion. It is an encyclopedia.
If an article addresses specific living persons (their thoughts, actions) the burden of proof is higher. The founder of Wikipedia writes:
The guidelines make it clear that this is not limited to biographical articles, it applies to all articles.