User talk:Ben6776

Reliable sources
Hi there. I saw that you're adding citations to articles, generally to the lead section. This can be helpful, but sometimes it's not necessary. Information that's already sourced in the article later generally doesn't need a redundant citation, but information that's not sourced in the body of the article should definitely have a citation. The real problem, though, is that you're sometimes citing unreliable sources, such as the IMDb. The IMDb is user-generated content, which means anyone can say anything on it – just like Wikipedia. So, it's not useful as a citation on Wikipedia and should not be cited. In general, reliable sources demonstrate a history of fact-checking and have a professional editorial staff. There's a degree of personal interpretation involved in many cases, since it may not be obvious whether a source is reliable or not. Sometimes it's easiest to stick to the most obviously reliable sources, such as newspapers, magazines, academic journals, etc. Then, if you find a source that looks reliable but you're not sure, you could raise the issue at the reliable sources noticeboard, where you can get input from experienced and opinionated editors. Thanks for taking the time to add citations to Wikipedia, and I hope this isn't too confusing. I know they may seem bureaucratic and annoying at first, but Wikipedia's guidelines generally start to make sense eventually. Well, most of them, at least. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)