Wikipedia talk:Request Edit Wizard

Feedback
Hi CM, I think this is a really nice idea. Just wanted to leave a note about some of the advice in this version. We do fix/remove errors and criticism that appear in RS, depending on UNDUE, accuracy, BLP issues, etc. We're also able to use primary sources, and we can use self-published primary sources, including personal and company websites, if they belong to the subject (WP:SELFPUB and WP:BLPSELFPUB).

We can't base entire articles on primary sources, and they have to be used with caution, but we often do, and sometimes have to, use them (to correct errors, for example, or to offer biographical details for which the subject is the most authoritative source). SlimVirgin (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * @SlimVirgin Yah, I just put "in most cases" but I'm not sure that completely addresses it. I will see if I can come up with something better. The problem is, in 90% of cases, we just get junk like "can we add three paragraphs about their philanthropic efforts cited to their website?" or "this criticism that the software has glitches is not true" CorporateM (Talk) 22:48, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I like your changes. Suggested tweaks:


 * Correct alleged errors published by reliable sources and repeated on Wikipedia, unless there is good cause to believe the material is mistaken
 * Accept biased or promotional content
 * Base a substantial body of content on primary sources such as the company website or press releases


 * SlimVirgin (talk) 17:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ I copy/pasted your version in with some tweaks. Of course you are also welcome to edit boldly, even if it is in my userspace atm. CorporateM (Talk) 17:57, 17 July 2014 (UTC)