Devildog72
Joined 20 December 2014
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Ian.thomson in topic A summary of site policies and guidelines you may find useful
Welcome!
editHello, Devildog72, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Ian.thomson (talk) 04:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
A summary of site policies and guidelines you may find useful
edit- "Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
- Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, use <ref>reference tags like this</ref>, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
- We do not publish original thought nor original research.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. -- Because of this, Wikipedia uses the academic form of the word "myth", which simply means a sacred story without any judgement as to whether it's right or wrong or in what ways it might be right or wrong.
- We do not give equal validity to topics which reject and are rejected by mainstream academia. For example, our article on Earth does not pretend it is flat, hollow, and/or the center of the universe.