User talk:Ryt 007/Archive 17

Capoeira in popular culture
I am also struggling to keep an article from the brink of deletion. It is Capoeira in popular culture. Please go visit the article and discuss if you believe you have some information to contribute, good or bad. Every opinion helps. ~  Ryt 007  &#124; Talk


 * Article voted to keep yesterday. I will start working on it soon to clean it up. ~  Ryt 007  &#124; Talk

Capoeira in popular culture: AfD
. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Gladiator rating
Just wanted to thank you for the rating. Gladiator was the bane and joy of my first editing experiences here... and the prose is a bit turgid, and the socio-religious dimension is not realised as clearly as might have been - but anyway, the "legacy" remains to be done, and you've given me a kick-start. Many thanks! Haploidavey (talk) 22:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Help
Hi there, I'm a relatively new WP user. I have been starting to inch my way into making bigger and braver edits on certain topics that I feel I have a strong working knowledge of. However, I often times feel I don't have the verifiable sources to back myself up. Do you know where on WP I can go to get some help for a starting user?

For example, you stated on the Dim Mak talk page "http://www.dimmakworld.com/ is not a reliable source, not even close". I don't really see how it's not reliable. Many sites I have looked at use websites like this as their only reliable sources. What constitutes good sourcing, and how can I find good sources to make back up my contributions?? I hope you understand what I'm getting at. Thank you for your time in advance. ~  Ryt 007  &#124; Talk
 * I do, and this can be difficult - finding reliable sourcing. "Websites" are not the problem; the problem is using websites which are reliable sources. Some sites are reliable sources, most are not. If you use websites, be sure they meet our guidelines. Look at the site itself - if it is commercial (selling something) then it usually is no good at all except as a source about the company itself, and that for limited use. If it is a news site like the New York Times, it is a valuable source for news - unless its the editorial or gossip column. If it is a blog, it is unusable 99 times out of 100; exceptions are known blogs of accepted experts or notable people. For example, Dawkins has a blog which he posts to; this is a source for what Dawkins says about a given thing. Read WP:V and most especially WP:RS; that will give you a better explanation of what type of sourcing is acceptable than I can easily give here. Watchlist the reliable sources noticeboard and follow it for a while - you will get a strong feel for what makes a source acceptable or not. You should also consider a library; most sourcing for obscure subjects is in books, not online. You can often find books on Google Books or Gutenberg Project as well. Hope this helps, and good luck~ KillerChihuahua ?!?Advice 13:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello Ryt 007, thank you for the WPMA Barnstar; that is kind of you. Janggeom (talk) 00:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)