User:Jamie Tubers/Adopt/5P

One of the most important essays on Wikipedia is the Five Pillars, which is structured to explicitly sum up the foundations of the Wikipedia Community. This guideline highlights the important objectives of Wikipedia, stating what Wikipedia is, and what it is not; it which includes the following:


 * 1) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - it combines many features of general and specialized publications. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, a vanity press, web directory, or an indiscriminate collection of information. It is not a dictionary or a newspaper


 * 1) Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view - We strive for articles that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight to different, but appropriate view points.


 * 1) Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute - Since all editors freely license their work to the public, no editor owns an article and any contributions can and will be edited and redistributed. Respect copyright laws, and never plagiarize from sources.


 * 1) Editors should treat each other with respect and civility - Respect other Wikipedians, even when you disagree. Apply Wikipedia etiquette, and don't engage in personal attacks.


 * 1) Wikipedia has no firm rules - Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time.


 * Once you get your head around these five pillars, you will be a Wikipedian and a good one at that. All 5 are covered in my adoption lesson, though at different lengths. Be aware that I don't know everything; no one does.

How articles should be written
The articles in Wikipedia are designed to represent the sum of human knowledge. Each article should be written from a neutral point of view – personal opinions such as right and wrong should never appear, nor should an editors experience. Neutrality also means giving due weight to the different points of view, including the views of those considered as a minority group. To ensure that the information in an article is correct, Wikipedia has adopted a policy of verifiability. Anything written in Wikipedia should be available to confirm by looking at the associated reliable source. Wikipedia should not include anything not verifiable by seeing it is published somewhere else that is reliable; in other words, it should not contain anything discovered by you, without a verification by a third party reliable source.

Reliable sources
So what is a source? Wikipedia uses the word source for three interchangeable ideas – a piece of work, the work's creator or the work's publisher. In general, you would expect a reliable source to be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. This doesn't mean that a source that is reliable on one topic is reliable on every topic, it must be regarded as authoritative in that topic. A source that is self-published is in general considered unreliable, unless it is published by a recognized expert in the field. This is a very rare exception – so self publishing is generally considered a no-no. This means that anything in a forum or a blog and even most websites are considered unreliable by default. One interesting sidepoint is on self-published sources talking about themselves. Obviously, a source talking about itself is going to be authoritative, but be careful that the source is not too self-serving – the article really should not be totally based on a direct source like that. Mainstream news sources are generally considered reliable... but any single article should be assessed on a case by case basis. Some news organizations have been known to check their information on Wikipedia – so be careful not to get into a cyclic sourcing issue! There's a lot more about what makes a source reliable here.

Cleanup patrol
In order to clearly and efficiently provide as much information as possible, Wikipedia has several editing guidelines to ensure that articles are kept neat and easy-to-read. The Manual of Style groups these guidelines into a sort of user's guide to editing Wikipedia. It outlines how to properly structure articles, and how to take care of the little nuances of English grammar in certain situations. Other policies and guidelines refer to how that information is to be presented. The Five Pillars of Wikipedia state that all information should be presented neutrally, and as such the Neutral Point of View, or NPOV policy is one of the most important within the project. Most pages on Wikipedia adhere to these policies and guidelines. For those that don't, we have cleanup.

Pages get added to the cleanup category when an editor adds a cleanup template to the page. These templates point out to editors and casual readers that there is a problem with the page, and as such can't be relied upon to be completely accurate or even legible. Editors are constantly needed to work on these pages to resolve immediate problems to help improve things. This can be as simple as doing some basic copyediting for grammar or spelling, or re-wording sentences to remove bias, or in extreme cases completely re-writing entire articles.

While tedious, such cleanup patrols are essential to keeping Wikipedia running smoothly. The Manual of Style and WP:CLEANUP both give details on how to do all that.

Wikiquette
WP:Wikiquette - or the etiquette of Wikipedia is simply some minor, but important details that re considered appropriate and necessary for smooth relationship of the community. I'm just going to highlight some of the important Wikiquette items that you should try and remember. It may help you out.


 * Assume good faith - This is fundamental and I'll be going over it again in dispute resolution. Editors here are trying to improve the encyclopedia. Every single member of the community. EVERY ONE. If you read a comment or look at an edit and it seems wrong in some way, don't just jump straight in. Try and see it from the other editors point of view, remembering that they are trying to improve the encyclopedia.
 * Sign your talk posts with four tildes ~ . The software will stick your signature and timestamp in, allowing the correct attribution to your comment. I have a script that reminds you to do this if you think you'll forget.
 * Try and keep to threading, replying to comments by adding an additional indentation, represented by a colon, : . I cover more about this in my basics of markup language lesson - let me know if you'd like to take it. Talk pages should something like this - Have a read of WP:THREAD to see how this works.


 * Watch out for common mistakes.
 * Did I mention that you should assume good faith? Don't ever forget to!!!
 * Comment on the edits. Not the editor. I'll cover this more in dispute resolution.

Questions?
Leave questions partaining to this lesson or other lessons, on your main lesson page. Regards.