Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Material about living persons available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should not be used, either as a source or as an external link . Never use self-published books, zines , websites, webforums, blogs and tweets as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the ...
Verifiable claims should be based on references released by established experts and/or publishers with editorial oversight that have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Wikipedia:Citing sources
Content: Accessibility – Biography – Linking – Self-References to Avoid – Words to Watch – Wikimedia Sister Projects Formatting: Abbreviations – Capital Letters – Dates and Numbers – Pronunciation – Spelling – Text Formatting – Titles of Works
Wikipedians developed the concept of "verifiability" (V) as a way of ensuring the accuracy of articles by encouraging editors to cite sources; this concept was established as a policy in August 2003. Verifiability was also promoted as a way to ensure that notable views would be represented, under the assumption that the most notable views were ...
Examples of the latter include guidelines on how policy should and should not be used, such as Don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point, The rules are principles, Don't be a fanatic, Ignore all rules (for exceptional cases where some rule inhibits good quality and appropriate work), Avoid instruction creep, Avoid wikilawyering (That is, follow ...
Unless the source exercises editorial control, e-prints and conference abstracts should be considered to be self-published. The above questions can be used to consider the reliability of self-published scientific material. See the policy on self-published sources at WP:SPS. Many of them are also primary sources, which should be treated with ...
To avoid such challenges, the best practice is to provide an inline citation when adding content (see: WP:Citing sources for instructions on how to do this, or ask for help at the Help desk). Wikipedia respects others' copyright. Although content must be backed by reliable sources, avoid copying or closely paraphrasing a copyrighted
If a party in the debate claims that the references used in the article are reliable sources, and gives an explanation why, this argument should be given more weight than an argument that merely claims the references are not reliable with no explanation. Similarly, if another party claims that the article is not notable and provides strong ...