User talk:HannahThistle
Welcome![edit]
|
Guide to referencing[edit]
Click on "show" on the right of the orange bar to open contents.
| Using references (citations) |
|---|
|
I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can remove unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started.
A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, and authorised web sites. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is original research (e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research), or another wikipedia article.
The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section (unless it already exists). This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:
The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):
Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference.
Open the edit box for this page, copy the following text (inserting your own text where indicated), paste it at the bottom of the page and save the page:
(End of text to copy and paste.) It should appear like this:
You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For an online newspaper source, it might look like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Note the single square brackets around the URL and the article title. The format is:
Make sure there is a space between the URL and the Title. This code results in the URL being hidden and the title showing as a link. Use double apostrophes for the article title (it is quoted text), and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics). Double square brackets round the name of the paper create an internal link (a wikilink) to the relevant wikipedia article. Apostrophes must go outside the brackets. The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings to display the date in the format the user wishes.
You can use sources which are not online, but which you have found in a library or elsewhere—in which case leave out the information which is not relevant. The newspaper example above would be formatted like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Here is an example for a book:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Make sure you put two single quote marks round the title (to generate italics), rather than one double quote mark.
These formats are all acceptable for dates:
You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference
The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code:
The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:
You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them. You can see multiple use of the same refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is.
The above method is simple and combines references and notes into one section. A refinement is to put the full details of the references in their own section headed "References", while the notes which apply to them appear in a separate section headed "Notes". The notes can be inserted in the main article text in an abbreviated form as seen in Harriet Arbuthnot or in a full form as in Brown Dog affair.
More information can be found at:
I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know. |
February 2008[edit]
Hi, the recent edit you made to Art in Ruins has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. ScarianCall me Pat 22:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
The recent edit you made to Art in Ruins constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. —DerHexer (Talk) 22:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC))
You commented on my talk page that the article "entirely misses the point and totally misrepresents the artists. It is better to have no article than this arbitrary edit and random references." Perhaps you could say what the point is, how this misrepresents the artist and why you supplied those references in the first place. Don't keep blanking the page or you'll be blocked from editing. Tyrenius (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could tell me why what you have cobbled together adequately represents the artists? Furthermore form has been used to CENSOR the content of the original article. I want it removed. HannahThistle (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry you are feeling frustrated with the article. You may not be familiar with the policies that govern all articles on wikipedia. I have left some links at the top of the page. The essential ones are WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:V (allied with WP:RS). WP:BLP is also pertinent. What this means basically is that article content has to be derived from verifiable, usually secondary, sources and referenced to them. The material in the article has been arrived at in that way and some of the sources are ones you provided. If they have not been used accurately, that needs to be addressed. If you disagree with, or don't like, what they've said, that is not a reason to not use those sources. If you have a web site (there is as yet no external links section, but a link to your web site be placed in one), you are welcome to make your own statement there, which can be used as a source to represent your position.
The original material you posted could not be allowed to stand because a) it is not the way wiki articles are written b) extensive quotes are a copyright violation and not permitted. There is no censorship. Any material which is balanced, sourced and referenced is eligible. The article at the moment is marked as a stub. This means that it is only a brief view of the subject and should be expanded. It is a common practice to cut articles down as a starting point, when they contain a large amount of unacceptable content. You have asked for it to be deleted. I would be opposed to this, as I think it is a valuable contribution to the coverage of contemporary UK art.
Tyrenius (talk) 01:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Sign[edit]
As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, and WikiProject pages. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then be automatically added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info, read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. Tyrenius (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
The file File:TrustUsLR.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 23 December 2019 (UTC)