Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
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 ...
A content discussion is about the content in question itself. Though the suitability of related content may be mentioned during the discussion, and some discussions are bundled together, the debate is not about the author or any other editors of the article. Content is to be judged on its own merits and not those of its editors or detractors.
References from questionable, historical and "raw" sources are examples of auxiliary sources. References from the subject, or those close to the subject, are also examples of auxiliary sources. [5] A third-party source from one article may be treated as an auxiliary source in another, because the focus has changed. [6]
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 ...
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
The purpose of this WikiProject has two main parts. First, it seeks to expand the coverage of weblogs on Wikipedia to the point where it is the most comprehensive resource in existence on this emerging aspect of online and media culture. Second, it seeks to do so sanely, and with an eye towards making sure the coverage reflects what is ...
Neutral point of view – All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately and without bias. Verifiability – Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source.