User talk:Heather Jayne Endall

February 2020
Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Craig Challen, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:45, 28 February 2020 (UTC)


 * This is as information, not as criticism. Wikipedia requires that facts, especially in biographies of living persons, be verified by a reliable, verifiable, neutral, third party source. Every other fact in Dr. Challen's article is so verified. The update to the record is a separate even which must be verified by a citation as well. Your edit remove a prior accomplishment (unnecessarily in my opinion) and added the new record - while leaving the original citation, which does not verify the new record, in place.


 * As to the Smith organization, there is no Wikipedia article of that name. The reader needs a (verified) explanation of what it is about and a citation to support Dr. Callen's connection to it. If there is no such explanation and reference, it would not seem to merit inclusion in the article.


 * Wikipedia's Verifiability policy is stated on several Wikipedia policy and guideline pages. For example, in "No original research. "Main page: Verifiability. Wikipedia's content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. The policy says that all material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, needs a reliable source; what counts as a reliable source is described at Verifiability."


 * "Wikipedia editors are not indifferent to truth, but as a collaborative project, its editors are not making judgments as to what is true and what is false, but what can be verified in a reliable source and otherwise belongs in Wikipedia." Verifiability, not truth.


 * Verifiability. "Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Source material must have been published, the definition of which for our purposes is "made available to the public in some form". Unpublished materials are not considered reliable."


 * Verifiability. "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution."


 * Helpful information about editing Wikipedia can be found on various Wikipedia guideline and policy pages including: Help:Getting started; Introduction; Simplified ruleset; Simplified Manual of Style; Referencing for beginners; Identifying reliable sources; Citing sources; Help:Footnotes; Verifiability; No original research; Neutral point of view; Notability; Biographies of living persons; What Wikipedia is not; Manual of Style/Words to watch; Help:Introduction to talk pages; Copyright Problems; External links; Spam; Conflict of interest; Paid-contribution disclosure and Help:Contents.


 * The bottom line is that a reliable, verifiable, neutral, third party source must be cited in order to add the new content. With such citations, the new information can be added. Thank you. Donner60 (talk)