Wikipedia talk:Be a reliable source
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Jlwoodwa in topic Wot?
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Wot?
editWikipedians are not "sources". What this essay means is "be trustworthy", but it strangely chose to mangle a piece of Wikipedia jargon instead of stating that. Fences&Windows 20:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with Fences and windows. Being honest and trustworthy is a good goal, but suggesting that editors can be sources is more confusing than inspiring. It also seems to misrepresent Wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources:
For example, a new editor might take this to mean that WP:NOR applies to reliable sources themselves, rather than the way Wikipedia can use them. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)The best way you can be a reliable source is to strictly adhere to the guidelines pertaining to them. This means to cite all information you add to articles, to be sure all information is verifiable, and not to include original research in your additions.