User talk:Citizenjamesford

RE: your question
''"i was unaware of the adding citations. any misleading comments were unintentional. if you can tell me examples of my previous postings being POV comments i will cite my sources and correct them.

james."''


 * Hi, not sure if your question was directed towards me or some other editor since you left it at an IP address not owned by anyone. I can offer advice and even fess up to doing the edit if you want to tell me what edit this refers to. You should leave such a request at this user page or at my user page since I may not be able to find that User talk:69.72.93.235 page again (though I just figured out how to link it ;^)). Fountains of Bryn Mawr 20:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm-- I think what you are referring to is User talk:209.40.3.98. If so here is Wikipedia's take on it:


 * The ability to provide sources for edits is mandated by No original research and Verifiability, which are policy. Attribution is required for direct quotes and for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged. Any material that is challenged and for which no source is provided may be removed by any editor.


 * In other words added material needs a source so that someone like me can come along and check it to see if:
 * you read the source right.
 * you miss interpreted it.
 * you have no source and are just putting forward a Point Of View.
 * you are putting forward something you researched your self (original research).


 * An example of an edit without enough information (a source) for an editor to make that decision is:
 * (Stir of Echoes) was critically well-received but did poorly at the box office. This is attributed to it opening four weeks after The Sixth Sense which has a very similiar premise seeing dead people and uncovering a murder.


 * According to who? What source says that? What was their data that backs up that statement? Off hand it looks like a Point Of View. See what I mean? Fountains of Bryn Mawr 20:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

NOR
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope. "Some random bozo's website" (even if that bozo is a Browncoat) is not a reliable source for speculation such as that. Suitable sources would be books, newspaper and magazine articles, and the like. Had such speculation appeared in one of the constitutuent articles in a book like, say, Finding Serenity, that would be different. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)