Wikipedia:Everything you need to know

Significant coverage

We need significant coverage. We need multiple sources that discuss the topic directly and in detail. Not: passing mentions, directory listings, government records, or any old thing that happens to have the topic's name in it.

Reliable sources

We need sources that are reliable. Usually this means that the publisher has a reputation for fact-checking, editorial oversight, and accuracy. For example: books from reputable publishing houses, mainstream newspapers, academic journals, magazines, and other established publications. Not: tabloids, discussion boards, fansites, social media, and most self-published blogs.

Independent

We need sources that are independent of the subject of the article. Not: books or articles written by the subject, material paid for or commissioned by the subject, press releases, or interviews where virtually all of the information comes from the subject or their spokesperson.

Statements that may be challenged

Any material without a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed. How quickly this should happen depends on the content and the overall state of the article. For biographies of living people, unsourced or poorly sourced material must be removed immediately if it is contentious.

Inline citations

Inline citations allow the reader to associate a given bit of material in an article with the specific reliable source(s) that support the material. Inline citations are most commonly added using footnote references (long or short). If short footnotes are present, it should be followed by a list of the full bibliography citations to which they refer.

Reliable sources

We need sources that are reliable. Usually this means that the publisher has a reputation for fact checking and the text must be approved by an editor before it is printed. For example: books from reputable publishing houses, mainstream newspapers, or other periodicals. Not: tabloids, discussion boards, fansites, social media, or most blogs.

Due and undue weight

Giving due weight means representing viewpoints in proportion to their prominence in the reliable sources you cite. Articles should not give minority views the same emphasis as widely held views, and very minor viewpoints may receive little or no coverage. Wikipedia should reflect the balance found in reliable sources, rather than creating its own balance between competing views.

Significant viewpoints

A significant viewpoint is one that has received enough attention in reliable sources to warrant inclusion. Its significance depends on its prominence in the sources, not simply on how often somebody expresses the view. Significant viewpoints should be represented fairly and in proportion to their prominence.

Taking sides

Wikipedia should not present its own opinions or take a side. Never state opinions as facts, use loaded language, or present one viewpoint more favourably than the sources justify.

Copying text

Do not copy text from books, websites, articles, or other sources unless it is in the public domain or released under a compatible licence that allows Wikipedia to use it. Citing a source does not give you permission to copy its wording.

Close paraphrasing

Changing a few words or rearranging sentences is not enough if the result still closely follows the original source. This is called close paraphrasing and can violate copyright. Read and understand the source, then explain the information in your own words.

Images and other media

Do not upload an image just because you found it online. Images and other media must normally be in the public domain or released under a licence Wikipedia can use. Some copyrighted material may be used under the strict non-free content criteria, but only in limited circumstances.

Original research

Wikipedia summarises information that has already been published by reliable sources. Do not add your own ideas, arguments, analysis, or conclusions if they are not supported by a reliable published source.

Primary sources

Primary sources can sometimes be used for straightforward statements about what they say, but they should be used carefully. Do not analyse, interpret, or evaluate a primary source yourself to reach a conclusion that reliable secondary sources have not made.

Synthesis of material

Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of them.

A conflict of interest

A conflict of interest arises when editing Wikipedia about yourself, your family, friends, clients, employers, or other financial and personal relationships. Any external relationship can create a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest editing is strongly discouraged. It undermines public confidence in Wikipedia and can embarrass the individuals or organisations involved. Editors with a conflict of interest should avoid editing affected articles directly and instead propose changes on the article’s talk page or make an edit request.

Declaring your conflict of interest

Editors should declare if they have a conflict of interest in a particular topic area. Doing so shows transparency, earns trust from other editors, and allows you to request that others post or review material on your behalf.

Paid editing

As part of the Wikimedia Terms and Conditions, if you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. Payment does not have to be financial; it includes any compensation, such as goods, services, or other benefits.

Good-faith editing

Is a pattern of editing that was intended to improve the encyclopedia. This can include edits blatantly against Wikipedia policy. It also includes test edits, edits by the user to see if they can edit a page. i.e. page blanking.

Clear evidence

If you wish to express doubts about the conduct of fellow Wikipedians, please substantiate those doubts with specific diffs and other relevant evidence, so that people can understand the basis for your concerns. Although bad conduct may seem to be due to bad faith, it is usually best to address the conduct without mentioning motives, which might worsen resentments all around.

Reaching consensus

Consensus is Wikipedia's normal way of making decisions. Often it happens naturally through editing: if an edit is made and nobody objects, it has presumed consensus. If an edit is disputed, editors should discuss the issue and try to reach an agreement or compromise.

Not a vote

Consensus does not require everyone to agree, and it is not decided by a simple majority. The strength and quality of arguments matter more than the number of people supporting each side. Arguments based on reliable sources and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines carry more weight than personal preferences.

Disagreements

It's normal to disagree on Wikipedia. If another editor disputes or reverts your edit, explain your reasoning and try to address their concerns. Don't repeatedly restore disputed material, as this may become edit warring. If discussion on the article's talk page does not resolve the disagreement, editors can use dispute resolution to seek outside help.

Comment on contributions

If you have a comment to make on a user's contribution, please do it civilly. Be kind and explain what your reason for the comment is, whether that be a question, an argument against their edit, or a thought. Do not comment on the editor; comment on their contribution.

Don't comment on the editors

Give constructive criticism and tell editor's what they could do to improve. Even if the user is doing something incorrectly, be civil. Rudeness and/or insults towards other users are unacceptable.

Hounding

Don't hound editors by following them across multiple pages or discussions to repeatedly confront them, obstruct their work, or cause them annoyance or distress.

Threats and unwanted contact

Threats, intimidation, repeated personal attacks, and repeated unwanted contact can be harassment. Do not repeatedly target another editor in a way intended to annoy, frighten, discourage, or intimidate them.

Posting personal information (Outing)

Do not post another editor's personal information unless they have voluntarily disclosed it on Wikipedia. This can include their real name, address, workplace, contact details, photographs, or profiles on other websites, whether the information is accurate or not. Posting such information is an unjustifiable and uninvited invasion of privacy and may place that editor at risk of harm. If personal information is posted improperly, do not repeat, confirm, or deny it: revert it and request it be removed via oversight.

Legal threats

Any threat of litigation to Wikipedia, or its holding organization Wikimedia; Wikimedia users or readers is considered a legal threat, and will result in your account being blocked. To notify the Wikimedia Foundation of litigation, use this page.

Multiple accounts

It is recommended that contributors do not use multiple accounts without good reason. For example, a user may wish to create an alternate account for use on public computers as a precaution to keep their primary account more secure. Contributors operating any sort of automated editing process should do so under an alternative bot account. It is recommended that multiple accounts be identified as such on their user pages; templates such as {{User alternative account}} or one of a selection of user boxes may be used for this purpose.

Recruiting others (meat puppetry)

Do not recruit your friends, family members, or communities of people who agree with you to come to Wikipedia and support your side of a debate. In Wikipedia terminology, this is called canvassing. If you feel that a debate is ignoring your voice, remain civil, and seek comments from other Wikipedians or pursue dispute resolution.

Administrative actions

Administrative actions are any sanctions such as blocks, or bans that were introduced by Administrators, the community, or the Arbitration Committee. If blocked, you can usually appeal on your talk page, which is only blocked if abused. If you cannot edit your talk page, then you must appeal via the Unblock Ticket Request System or by emailing the Arbitration Committee.

Wikipedia policy

Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are pages that serve to document the good practices that are accepted in the Wikipedia community. Wikimedia policies, such as Wikimedia: Terms of Use & Wikimedia: Privacy policy can never be overridden by local policies.

Creating the illusion of greater support for an argument

Making multiple accounts to support your side of an argument is not allowed. If you use your alternative account to comment in a discussion, announce that you're commenting for your main account.