Welcome!
Hello, Dadaw, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
Ian.thomson (
talk)
18:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- "Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
- We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
- Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
- Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources. Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for. In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence. In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine. -- I have removed your addition to the alternative views section of the Beast article under this guideline, as they are, within their belief systems, the logical conclusion of Biblical study. This is not to say they are right, but in the absence of divine mandate on the issue, Wikipedia will remain agnostic in its treatment of the subject. Ian.thomson ( talk) 18:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, if you want to merge the beast articles, go right ahead.-- Epiphyllumlover ( talk) 22:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Dadaw, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
Ian.thomson (
talk)
18:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- "Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
- We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
- Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
- Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources. Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for. In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence. In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine. -- I have removed your addition to the alternative views section of the Beast article under this guideline, as they are, within their belief systems, the logical conclusion of Biblical study. This is not to say they are right, but in the absence of divine mandate on the issue, Wikipedia will remain agnostic in its treatment of the subject. Ian.thomson ( talk) 18:36, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, if you want to merge the beast articles, go right ahead.-- Epiphyllumlover ( talk) 22:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)