User:GreenMeansGo/Script-like-thing

PLAIN WHITE BACKGROUND (EVERY SCENE), CASUALLY DRESSED MALE AND FEMALE SIDE-BY-SIDE FACING CAMERA, WIKIPEDIA LOGO IN CORNER.

FEMALE: Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia!

MALE: And welcome to our video tutorial on reliable sources!

FEMALE: [ALONE] When someone on Wikipedia refers to R S [CORNER BOLD BLACK FONT "RS"] or links to W P R S [CORNER BOLD BLUE FONT "WP:RS"] what they're talking about is [BOTTOM BLACK FONT "Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources"] Wikipedia's guidance on identifying reliable sources. Part of what makes Wikipedia so great, is that it's written by people like you and me, using sources from people who write, report, and do research professionally. So when someone reads an article and thinks...

MALE: [ALONE, OBVIOUSLY PONDERING ALOUD] I wonder where that information came from...

FEMALE: [VOICE OVER] You can say...

[MALE AND FEMALE FACING EACH OTHER, FEMALE WITH ARMS OUTSTRETCHED HOLDING A LARGE BOOK]

FEMALE: Here, I read it in this book.

MALE: [ALONE] But there are lots of different types of sources to choose from, and so Wikipedia uses a few general rules to tell which ones are best, and which ones to avoid.

FEMALE: [ALONE] The first rule is that a source needs to be published, meaning that a total stranger can hop online, or visit their local library and verify what's in an article. Usually, this means things like magazines, newspapers, books, or academic journals.

MALE: [ALONE] It's often best, but not absolutely required, if these sources are available online, and in English for the English Wikipedia, but the most important thing is that somebody can check what's written in an article, even if they might need a little help finding or reading it.

FEMALE: [ALONE] This also means we should avoid using most sources that are self-published like blogs, social media, or user generated content online, because anyone can pretty much write anything they want, and there's nobody there to double check whether they're making a huge error, or just making things up.

MALE: [ALONE, TO THE SIDE, TYPING AT A LAPTOP SET ON A STOOL OR SMALL TABLE] Paris, is... [PONDERING, OBVIOUSLY MAKING THINGS UP OFF THE TOP OF HIS HEAD AS HE TYPES] not the capital of France, and the sky is.. umm.. [SUDDENLY EXCITED AS IF HE'S FOUND SOMETHING] actually green.

FEMALE: [WALKS ON CAMERA FROM SIDE IN A RUSH, WAVING ARMS IN A "NO WAY" MOTION] Wait a minute!...

MALE: [ALONE] It also means we shouldn't use sources that just aren't published at all, and are pretty much not available to anybody.

FEMALE: [ALONE, HOLDING LARGE CARDBOARD BOX WITH "Attic" WRITTEN ON THE FRONT IN PERMANENT MARKER] Hey! I think I found grandma's old letters!

MALE: [ALONE] Next, we want to make sure that we're using third party sources, that are independent from the subject they're writing about.

FEMALE: [ALONE] This means that we might be able to use something like an official website for pretty plain boring facts.

MALE: [AT LAPTOP AGAIN, CRACKING FINGERS] Time to write my website, let's see... [TYPING ALOUD] "My company is located in Manchester..."

FEMALE: [ALONE] But we have to be very careful to avoid using what people write about themselves for basically anything else.

MALE: [AT LAPTOP AGAIN, TYPING ALOUD, EXCITEDLY] My company is the best company EVER!

FEMALE: [ALONE] And we also want to avoid people who might be writing on behalf of someone else, or mainly to advertise, instead of being informative.

[FEMALE AT LAPTOP, IN SAME POSITION AS MALE PREVIOUSLY WAS, MALE STANDS BEHIND HER HOLDING CARTOONISH BRIEF CASE WITH MONEY SYMBOL ON IT]

FEMALE: [TYPING ALOUD, EXCITEDLY] His company is the best company EVER!

MALE: [ALONE] For pretty much anything, the more people who help to fact-check what's written, the better the source is.

FEMALE: [ALONE] So for example, a book will probably have a publisher who reviews the manuscript before it hits the shelves, and a peer reviewed journal or large newspaper may have a whole team of people who check every detail of a piece before it's finally published.

[MALE AND FEMALE FACING EACH OTHER, FEMALE HANDS MALE A STACK OF PAPER INTENDED TO BE A MANUSCRIPT, OBVIOUSLY LITTERED WITH STICKY NOTES AND MARKED UP WITH RED PERMANENT PARKER]

FEMALE: [RELUCTANTLY, AS IF TO SAY "I'M REALLY SORRY ABOUT THIS"] I may have made a few small corrections to your manuscript.

[MALE TAKES THE MANUSCRIPT WIDE EYED WITH A FLABBERGASTED LOOK]

FEMALE: [ALONE] Who wrote something is important too, and we should prefer sources from recognized experts in their field, and from established academic or educational institutions like museums, or respected publishers like universities or long standing newspapers.

MALE: [ALONE] Next, we need to consider when the source was written. Sometimes a source is just too old and out of date, and we need to look for newer ones instead.

[FEMALE, ALONE, BLOWS THE DUST OF A LARGE LEATHER BOUND BOOK, WITH A CONFUSED LOOK] Earth is the center of the solar system?

MALE: [ALONE] But a source might also be too new, and we may need to wait a little while for everyone to get their story straight.

[FEMALE, ALONE, RUNS FRANTICALLY ON CAMERA ACROSS THE SCREEN AND OFF CAMERA WAVING NEWSPAPERS IN EACH HAND] Breaking news! Breaking news!

FEMALE: [ALONE] We also want to consider whether a source might be biased, and if we include opinions in an article, instead of saying it in what's called "Wikipedia's voice"

MALE: [ALONE, INAPPROPRIATELY EXCITED, A LITTLE TOO CLOSE TO THE CAMERA] They're the best football team this season!

FEMALE: [ALONE] We should attribute that opinion to wherever it's actually coming from.

MALE: [ALONE, MORE PROPER, HOLDING A NEWSPAPER, APPROPRIATE DISTANCE FROM CAMERA, WEARING READING GLASSES WITH A SOPHISTICATED ATTITUDE] According to a story published here, this reporter called them the best football team this season.

MALE: [ALONE] But even in the best of times, reliable sources might disagree, and we have to consider what the mainstream view is in most of the best quality sources available.

[BOTH SEATED AT A TABLE, FEMALE LEFT IN FRONT OF A SIGN SAYING "NO", WITH A SMALL BOOK, MALE RIGHT IN FRONT OF A SIGN THAT SAYS "YES", WITH AN EXCESSIVE STACK OF BOOKS AND NEWSPAPERS]

[FEMALE, WAVING SMALL BOOK] This one says no!

[MALE, WIDE EYED, LOUDLY CLEARES THROAT AND MOTIONS DRAMTICALLY WITH BOTH HANDS TO THE STACK OF SOURCES NEXT TO HIM]

FEMALE: [ALONE] There are some topics in particular that we have to be especially careful with and use only the highest quality sources.

MALE: [ALONE] This includes articles on medical topics, which have serious potential to cause harm if they're not accurate.

'''[MALE AND FEMALE. MALE IS HOLDING A SMALL HAND SAW AT HIS OWN INNER ELBOW]'''

FEMALE What on Earth are you doing!?

MALE: [OVERLY DRAMATIC] Listen, I read the Wikipedia article, and it said this arm has got to go.

MALE: [ALONE] We also have to be careful with any content that deals with living persons and never add or leave unsourced or poorly sourced material on living people in articles, especially contentious material.

FEMALE: [ALONE, ANGRILY STORMS ON CAMERA TOWARD OPPOSITE OFF CAMERA] ''I can't believe what somebody wrote about me on Wikipedia! Somebody call my lawyer!''

MALE: [ALONE] Each of these has their own individual guidance for how to best handle content in these areas, [CORNER BOLD BLUE FONT "WP:BLP"] B L P for biographies of living persons, [CORNER BOLD BLUE FONT "WP:MEDRS"] and Med R S for medical content.

[MALE AND FEMALE TOGETHER, FACING CAMERA]

FEMALE: Overall, some times it's easy to tell whether a source is reliable or not, and knowing the difference usually gets easier over time with practice. Other times, the reliability of a source can be a complicated question that has to do with what information is coming from whom, when, and where.

MALE For complex cases, it's usually a good starting place to start a discussion on the article talk page and see what others think, [CORNER BOLD BLUE FONT "WP:RSN"] or you can ask at the reliable sources noticeboard, or R S N.

FEMALE: Hopefully this video helped introduce you to the types of things to consider when dealing with sources. For more information, see the policy itself and don't be afraid to ask questions. Happy editing!