Contents 1 Using sources 1.1 Reliable sources 1.2 Primary, secondary and tertiary sources 2 Synthesis of published material 3 Original images 4 Translations and transcriptions 5 Routine calculations 6 Related policies 6.1 Verifiability 6.2 Neutral point of view 7 See also 7.1 Guidelines 7.2 Templates 7.3 Essays 7.4 Research help 8 Notes 9 Further reading


Using sources Policy shortcut WP:STICKTOSOURCE Research that consists of collecting and organizing material from existing sources within the provisions of this and other content policies is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia. Best practice is to research the most reliable sources on the topic and summarize what they say in your own words, with each statement in the article attributable to a source that makes that statement explicitly. Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication. Take care not to go beyond what is expressed in the sources, or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context. In short, stick to the sources. If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery. Reliable sources Further information: Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources Any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by a reliable source. Material for which no reliable source can be found is considered original research. The only way you can show your edit is not original research is to cite a reliable published source that contains the same material. Even with well-sourced material, if you use it out of context, or to reach or imply a conclusion not directly and explicitly supported by the source, you are engaging in original research; see below. In general, the most reliable sources are: Peer-reviewed journals Books published by university presses University-level textbooks Magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses Mainstream newspapers As a rule of thumb, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication. Self-published material, whether on paper or online, is generally not regarded as reliable, but see self-published sources for exceptions. Information in an article must be verifiable in the references cited. In general, article statements should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, or on passing comments. Passages open to multiple interpretations should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source. Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source. It is important that references be cited in context and on topic. Primary, secondary and tertiary sources Policy shortcuts WP:PSTS WP:PRIMARY WP:SECONDARY WP:TERTIARY "WP:PRIMARY" redirects here. For the article naming guideline, see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Further information: Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources. All analyses and interpretive or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary or tertiary source, and must not be an original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors. Appropriate sourcing can be a complicated issue, and these are general rules. Deciding whether primary, secondary or tertiary sources are appropriate in any given instance is a matter of good editorial judgment and common sense, and should be discussed on article talk pages. A source may be considered primary for one statement but secondary for a different one, and sources can contain both primary and secondary source material for the same statement. For the purposes of this policy, primary, secondary and tertiary sources are defined as follows:[2] Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved. They offer an insider's view of an event, a period of history, a work of art, a political decision, and so on. Primary sources may or may not be independent or third-party sources. An account of a traffic incident written by a witness is a primary source of information about the event; similarly, a scientific paper documenting a new experiment conducted by the author is a primary source on the outcome of that experiment. Historical documents such as diaries are primary sources.[3] Policy: Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.[4] Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them. Policy shortcut WP:I-SAW-IT Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material. Use extra caution when handling primary sources about living people; see WP:Biographies of living persons § Avoid misuse of primary sources, which is policy. Policy shortcuts WP:ANALYSIS WP:AEIS A secondary source provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. Secondary sources are not necessarily independent or third-party sources. They rely on primary sources for their material, making analytic or evaluative claims about them.[5] For example, a review article that analyzes research papers in a field is a secondary source for the research.[6] Whether a source is primary or secondary depends on context. A book by a military historian about the Second World War might be a secondary source about the war, but where it includes details of the author's own war experiences, it would be a primary source about those experiences. A book review too can be an opinion, summary or scholarly review.[7] Policy: Wikipedia articles usually rely on material from reliable secondary sources. Articles may make an analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claim only if that has been published by a reliable secondary source. Tertiary sources are publications such as encyclopedias and other compendia that summarize primary and secondary sources. Wikipedia is a tertiary source.[8] Many introductory undergraduate-level textbooks are regarded as tertiary sources because they sum up multiple secondary sources. Policy: Reliable tertiary sources can be helpful in providing broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources, and may be helpful in evaluating due weight, especially when primary or secondary sources contradict each other. Some tertiary sources are more reliable than others, and within any given tertiary source, some entries may be more reliable than others. Wikipedia articles may not be used as tertiary sources in other Wikipedia articles, but are sometimes used as primary sources in articles about Wikipedia itself (see Category:Wikipedia and Category:WikiProject Wikipedia articles).


Synthesis of published material Policy shortcuts WP:SYN WP:SYNTH WP:SYNTHESIS WP:ORIGINALSYN See also: Wikipedia:What SYNTH is not Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source. If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources. This would be improper editorial synthesis of published material to imply a new conclusion, which is original research performed by an editor here.[9] "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published the same argument in relation to the topic of the article. If a single source says "A" in one context, and "B" in another, without connecting them, and does not provide an argument of "therefore C", then "therefore C" cannot be used in any article. Here are two sentences showing simple examples of improper editorial synthesis In this first sentence, both parts of the sentence may be reliably sourced, but they have been combined to imply that the UN has failed to maintain world peace. If no reliable source has combined the material in this way, it is original research. N The United Nations' stated objective is to maintain international peace and security, but since its creation there have been 160 wars throughout the world. In this second sentence, the opposite is implied using the same material, illustrating how easily material can be manipulated when the sources are not adhered to: N The United Nations' stated objective is to maintain international peace and security, and since its creation there have been only 160 wars throughout the world. Here are two paragraphs showing more complex examples of editorial synthesis. They are based on an actual Wikipedia article about a dispute between two authors, here called Smith and Jones. This first paragraph is fine, because each of the sentences is carefully sourced, using a source that refers to the same dispute: Y Smith stated that Jones committed plagiarism by copying references from another author's book. Jones responded that it is acceptable scholarly practice to use other people's books to find new references. This second paragraph demonstrates improper editorial synthesis: N If Jones did not consult the original sources, this would be contrary to the practice recommended in the Harvard Writing with Sources manual, which requires citation of the source actually consulted. The Harvard manual does not call violating this rule "plagiarism". Instead, plagiarism is defined as using a source's information, ideas, words, or structure without citing them. The second paragraph is original research because it expresses a Wikipedia editor's opinion that, given the Harvard manual's definition of plagiarism, Jones did not commit it. To make the second paragraph consistent with this policy, a reliable source would be needed that specifically comments on the Smith and Jones dispute and makes the same point about the Harvard manual and plagiarism. In other words, that precise analysis must have been published by a reliable source in relation to the topic before it can be published on Wikipedia.


Original images Policy shortcut WP:OI See also: WP:Manual of Style/Images § Pertinence and encyclopedic nature, and WP:Image use policy § Image titles and file names Because of copyright laws in a number of countries, there are relatively few images available for use on Wikipedia. Editors are therefore encouraged to upload their own images, releasing them under appropriate Creative Commons licenses, or other free licenses. Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments, the core reason behind the NOR policy. Image captions are subject to this policy no less than statements in the body of the article. It is not acceptable for an editor to use photo manipulation to distort the facts or position illustrated by an image. Manipulated images should be prominently noted as such. Any manipulated image where the encyclopedic value is materially affected should be posted to Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Images of living persons must not present the subject in a false or disparaging light.


Translations and transcriptions Policy shortcut WP:TRANSCRIPTION See also: WP:Translation Faithfully translating sourced material into English, or transcribing spoken words from audio or video sources, is not considered original research. For information on how to handle sources that require translation, see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources.


Routine calculations Policy shortcut WP:CALC Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the result of the calculation is obvious, correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources. Basic arithmetic, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age are some examples of routine calculations. See also Category:Conversion templates.


Related policies Verifiability Main page: Wikipedia:Verifiability Policy shortcut WP:VERIFYOR 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 here. Neutral point of view Main page: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view The prohibition against original research limits the extent to which editors may present their own points of view in articles. By reinforcing the importance of including verifiable research produced by others, this policy promotes the inclusion of multiple points of view. Consequently, this policy reinforces our neutrality policy. In many cases, there are multiple established views of any given topic. In such cases, no single position, no matter how well researched, is authoritative. It is not the responsibility of any one editor to research all points of view. But when incorporating research into an article, it is important that editors provide context for this point of view, by indicating how prevalent the position is, and whether it is held by a majority or minority. The inclusion of a view that is held only by a tiny minority may constitute original research. Jimbo Wales has said of this: If your viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts; If your viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents; If your viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, then—whether it's true or not, whether you can prove it or not—it doesn't belong in Wikipedia, except perhaps in some ancillary article. Wikipedia is not the place for original research.[10]


See also Wikiversity allows original research Guidelines Wikipedia:Citing sources—guideline Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Citing yourself—guideline Wikipedia:No original research/Examples No original research noticeboard—discussions of specific article content suspected of being OR Templates {{Original research}}—used to warn of original research {{OR}}—inline tag used to warn of original research {{Synthesis}}—used to warn of unpublished synthesis {{AEIS}}—used in talk/noticeboards to remind that analytic, evaluative, interpretive, or synthetic claims require secondary sources Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes—lists other warning templates related to OR, among others Essays Wikipedia:Cherrypicking Wikipedia:Dictionaries as sources Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources Wikipedia:No original research/history, an essay on the origins of this policy Wikipedia:POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields Wikipedia:Party and person a.k.a. Wikipedia:Secondary does not mean independent Wikipedia:These are not original research Wikipedia:Use of tertiary sources Wikipedia:Using maps and similar sources in wikipedia articles Wikipedia:What SYNTH is not Research help Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library


Notes ^ a b By "exists", the community means that the reliable source must have been published and still exist—somewhere in the world, in any language, whether or not it is reachable online—even if no source is currently named in the article. Articles that currently name zero references of any type may be fully compliant with this policy—so long as there is a reasonable expectation that every bit of material is supported by a published, reliable source. ^ This University of Maryland library page provides typical examples of primary, secondary and tertiary sources. Retrieved 26 July 2013. ^ Further examples of primary sources include archeological artifacts, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, investigative reports, trial/litigation in any country (including material — which relates to either the trial or to any of the parties involved in the trial — published/authored by any involved party, before, during or after the trial), editorials, columns, blogs, opinion pieces, or (depending on context) interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; original philosophical works; religious scripture; ancient works, even if they cite earlier writings (lost or otherwise); tomb plaques; and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos and television programs. For definitions of primary sources: The University of Nevada, Reno Libraries define primary sources as providing "an inside view of a particular event". They offer as examples: original documents, such as autobiographies, diaries, e-mail, interviews, letters, minutes, news film footage, official records, photographs, raw research data, and speeches; creative works, such as art, drama, films, music, novels, poetry; and relics or artifacts, such as buildings, clothing, DNA, furniture, jewelry, pottery. The University of California, Berkeley library offers this definition: "Primary sources were either created during the time period being studied or were created at a later date by a participant in the events being studied (as in the case of memoirs). They reflect the individual viewpoint of a participant or observer. Primary sources enable the researcher to get as close as possible to what actually happened during an historical event or time period". Duke University, Libraries offers this definition: "A primary source is a first-hand account of an event. Primary sources may include newspaper articles, letters, diaries, interviews, laws, reports of government commissions, and many other types of documents." ^ Any exceptional claim would require exceptional sources. ^ University of California, Berkeley library defines "secondary source" as "a work that interprets or analyzes an historical event or phenomenon. It is generally at least one step removed from the event". ^ The Ithaca College Library compares research articles to review articles. Be aware that either type of article can be both a primary and secondary source, although research articles tend to be more useful as primary sources and review articles as secondary sources. ^ Book reviews may be found listed under separate sections within a news source or might be embedded within larger news reports. Multiple coverage in book reviews is considered one of the notability criteria for books; book reviews should be considered as supporting sources in articles about books. Avoid using book reviews as reliable sources for the topics covered in the book; a book review is intended to be an independent review of the book, the author and related writing issues than be considered a secondary source for the topics covered within the book. For definitions of book reviews: Princeton's Wordnet 2011 scholarly definitions repository defines book review as "a critical review of a book (usually, [of] a recently published book)." VirginiaTech University Libraries provides the following definition: "A book review is an article that is published in a newspaper, magazine or scholarly work that describes and evaluates a book... Reviews differ from literary critiques of books. Critiques explore the style and themes used by an author or genre." ^ While it is a tertiary source, Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia articles; see WP:Verifiability § Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it, and WP:Identifying reliable sources § User-generated content. ^ Jimmy Wales has said of synthesized historical theories: "Some who completely understand why Wikipedia ought not create novel theories of physics by citing the results of experiments and so on and synthesizing them into something new, may fail to see how the same thing applies to history." (Wales, Jimmy. "Original research", December 6, 2004) ^ Wales, Jimmy. "WikiEN-l roy_q_royce@hotmail.com: --A Request RE a WIKIArticle--", September 29, 2003.


Further reading Listen to this page (info/dl) This audio file was created from a revision of the article "No original research" dated 2007-01-27, and does not reflect subsequent edits to the page. (Audio help) More spoken pages Wales, Jimmy. Crackpot articles, mailing list, July 12, 2003. Wales, Jimmy. "NPOV and 'new physics'", mailing list, September 26, 2003. Wales, Jimmy. "NPOV and 'new physics'", mailing list, September 26, 2003 (followup to above) Wales, Jimmy. "Original research", mailing list, December 3, 2004 Wales, Jimmy. "Original research", mailing list, December 6, 2004 v t e Wikipedia key policies and guidelines Five pillars What Wikipedia is not Ignore all rules Content Verifiability No original research Neutral point of view What Wikipedia is not Biographies of living persons Image use Wikipedia is not a dictionary Article titles Notability Autobiography Citing sources Identifying reliable sources medicine Do not include copies of primary sources Plagiarism Don't create hoaxes Fringe theories Patent nonsense External links Conduct Civility Consensus Editing policy Harassment Vandalism Ignore all rules No personal attacks Ownership of content Edit warring Dispute resolution Sock puppetry No legal threats Child protection Paid-contribution disclosure Assume good faith Conflict of interest Disruptive editing Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point Etiquette Gaming the system Please do not bite the newcomers Courtesy vanishing Deletion Deletion policy Proposed deletion Criteria for speedy deletion Attack page Oversight Proposed deletion of BLP Proposed deletion (books) Revision deletion Enforcement Administrators Banning Blocking Page protection Editing Article size Be bold Disambiguation Hatnotes Set index articles Subpages User pages Talk page guidelines Signatures Broad-concept article Project namespace WikiProjects Style Manual of Style Contents Accessibility Understandability Dates and numbers Images Layout Lead section Linking Lists Classification Categories, lists, and navigation templates Categorization Template namespace WMF List of policies Friendly space policy Licensing and copyright Privacy policy Values FAQ List of all policies and guidelines List of policies List of guidelines Lists of attempts in creating fundamental principles Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:No_original_research&oldid=826144483#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources" Categories: Wikipedia policiesWikipedia content policiesWikipedia verifiabilityHidden categories: Wikipedia semi-protected project pagesWikipedia move-protected project pages


Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged inTalkContributionsCreate accountLog in Namespaces Project pageTalk Variants Views ReadView sourceView history More Search Navigation Main pageContentsFeatured contentCurrent eventsRandom articleDonate to WikipediaWikipedia store Interaction HelpAbout WikipediaCommunity portalRecent changesContact page Tools What links hereRelated changesUpload fileSpecial pagesPermanent linkPage informationWikidata item Print/export Create a bookDownload as PDFPrintable version In other projects Meta-WikiWikispeciesWikibooksWikiversity Languages AfrikaansAlemannischالعربيةঅসমীয়াAzərbaycancaবাংলাБеларускаяभोजपुरीБългарскиBoarischCatalàČeštinaDeutschΕλληνικάEspañolEsperantoفارسیFrançaisGalegoગુજરાતી한국어Հայերենहिन्दीIlokanoBahasa IndonesiaÍslenskaItalianoBasa Jawaಕನ್ನಡქართულიҚазақшаLietuviųMagyarМакедонскиമലയാളംمازِرونیBahasa MelayuBaso MinangkabauNederlandsनेपाली日本語NorskNorsk nynorskPolskiPortuguêsRomânăРусскийShqipSicilianuසිංහලSimple EnglishSlovenčinaSlovenščinaکوردیСрпски / srpskiSrpskohrvatski / српскохрватскиSuomiSvenskaதமிழ்Татарча/tatarçaతెలుగుไทยТоҷикӣTürkçeУкраїнськаاردوTiếng Việtייִדיש中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 17 February 2018, at 13:21. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Developers Cookie statement Mobile view (window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgPageParseReport":{"limitreport":{"cputime":"0.364","walltime":"0.470","ppvisitednodes":{"value":3584,"limit":1000000},"ppgeneratednodes":{"value":0,"limit":1500000},"postexpandincludesize":{"value":107215,"limit":2097152},"templateargumentsize":{"value":4538,"limit":2097152},"expansiondepth":{"value":9,"limit":40},"expensivefunctioncount":{"value":22,"limit":500},"entityaccesscount":{"value":0,"limit":400},"timingprofile":["100.00% 366.762 1 -total"," 23.56% 86.410 9 Template:Policy_shortcut"," 14.88% 54.567 9 Template:Bulleted_list"," 13.85% 50.794 1 Template:Pp-semi-indef"," 11.68% 42.826 8 Template:Navbox"," 11.32% 41.507 1 Template:Policy"," 10.34% 37.908 1 Template:Ombox"," 8.02% 29.415 16 Template:No_redirect"," 7.96% 29.206 1 Template:Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines"," 7.05% 25.853 9 Template:For_nowiki"]},"scribunto":{"limitreport-timeusage":{"value":"0.135","limit":"10.000"},"limitreport-memusage":{"value":3866674,"limit":52428800}},"cachereport":{"origin":"mw1265","timestamp":"20180219030828","ttl":1900800,"transientcontent":false}}});});(window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgBackendResponseTime":87,"wgHostname":"mw1331"});});


Wikipedia:Primary - Photos and All Basic Informations

Wikipedia:Primary More Links

This Page Is Semi-protected.Wikipedia:WikiProject NorwayWikipedia:No Original Research/NoticeboardWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:What "Ignore All Rules" MeansWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Core Content PoliciesWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Content PoliciesWikipedia:Article TitlesWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Image Use PolicyWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotTemplate:Content Policy ListTemplate Talk:Content Policy ListEnlargeOriginal ResearchWikipedia:VerifiabilityHelp:Using Talk PagesWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:CHALLENGEDWikipedia:PlagiarismWikipedia:Copyright ViolationsWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:NORNWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutOut Of ContextWikipedia:Third-party SourcesWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:LIKELYWikipedia:SYNWikipedia:SPSWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:PRIMARYTOPICWikipedia:Identifying And Using Primary SourcesWikipedia:RSSecondary SourceTertiary SourcePrimary SourceWikipedia:COMMONPrimary SourceWikipedia:Independent SourcesWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutSecondary SourceWikipedia:Secondary Does Not Mean IndependentTertiary SourceCompendiumWikipedia:DUECategory:WikipediaCategory:WikiProject Wikipedia ArticlesWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:What SYNTH Is NotWikipedia:RSWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ImagesWikipedia:Image Use PolicyCreative CommonsCategory:Creative Commons Copyright TemplatesPhoto ManipulationWikipedia:Files For DiscussionWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:TranslationWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:VerifiabilityBasic ArithmeticCategory:Conversion TemplatesWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:SOURCESWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewJimmy WalesWikiversityWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Conflict Of InterestWikipedia:No Original Research/ExamplesWikipedia:No Original Research/NoticeboardTemplate:Original ResearchTemplate:ORTemplate:SynthesisTemplate:AEISWikipedia:Template Messages/DisputesWikipedia:CherrypickingWikipedia:Dictionaries As SourcesWikipedia:Identifying And Using Primary And Secondary SourcesWikipedia:No Original Research/historyWikipedia:POV And OR From Editors, Sources, And FieldsWikipedia:Party And PersonWikipedia:Secondary Does Not Mean IndependentWikipedia:These Are Not Original ResearchWikipedia:Use Of Tertiary SourcesWikipedia:Using Maps And Similar Sources In Wikipedia ArticlesWikipedia:What SYNTH Is NotWikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource RequestWikipedia:The Wikipedia LibraryWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Notability (books)Wikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesFile:Wikipedia-No Original Research.oggWikipedia:Media HelpWikipedia:Spoken ArticlesTemplate:Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesTemplate Talk:Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Five PillarsWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:Ignore All RulesWikipedia:VerifiabilityWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Image Use PolicyWikipedia:Wikipedia Is Not A DictionaryWikipedia:Article TitlesWikipedia:NotabilityWikipedia:AutobiographyWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources (medicine)Wikipedia:Do Not Include The Full Text Of Lengthy Primary SourcesWikipedia:PlagiarismWikipedia:Do Not Create HoaxesWikipedia:Fringe TheoriesWikipedia:Patent NonsenseWikipedia:External LinksWikipedia:CivilityWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:Editing PolicyWikipedia:HarassmentWikipedia:VandalismWikipedia:Ignore All RulesWikipedia:No Personal AttacksWikipedia:Ownership Of ContentWikipedia:Edit WarringWikipedia:Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:Sock PuppetryWikipedia:No Legal ThreatsWikipedia:Child ProtectionWikipedia:Paid-contribution DisclosureWikipedia:Assume Good FaithWikipedia:Conflict Of InterestWikipedia:Disruptive EditingWikipedia:Do Not Disrupt Wikipedia To Illustrate A PointWikipedia:EtiquetteWikipedia:Gaming The SystemWikipedia:Please Do Not Bite The NewcomersWikipedia:Courtesy VanishingWikipedia:Deletion PolicyWikipedia:Proposed DeletionWikipedia:Criteria For Speedy DeletionWikipedia:Attack PageWikipedia:OversightWikipedia:Proposed Deletion Of Biographies Of Living PeopleWikipedia:Proposed Deletion (books)Wikipedia:Revision DeletionWikipedia:AdministratorsWikipedia:Banning PolicyWikipedia:Blocking PolicyWikipedia:Protection PolicyWikipedia:Article SizeWikipedia:Be BoldWikipedia:DisambiguationWikipedia:HatnoteWikipedia:Set Index ArticlesWikipedia:SubpagesWikipedia:User PagesWikipedia:Talk Page GuidelinesWikipedia:SignaturesWikipedia:Broad-concept ArticleWikipedia:Project NamespaceWikipedia:WikiProject Council/GuideWikipedia:Manual Of StyleWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ContentsWikipedia:Manual Of Style/AccessibilityWikipedia:Make Technical Articles UnderstandableWikipedia:Manual Of Style/Dates And NumbersWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ImagesWikipedia:Manual Of Style/LayoutWikipedia:Manual Of Style/Lead SectionWikipedia:Manual Of Style/LinkingWikipedia:Manual Of Style/ListsWikipedia:Categories, Lists, And Navigation TemplatesWikipedia:CategorizationWikipedia:Template NamespaceWikipedia:List Of Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:List Of PoliciesWikipedia:List Of GuidelinesWikipedia:PrinciplesHelp:CategoryCategory:Wikipedia PoliciesCategory:Wikipedia Content PoliciesCategory:Wikipedia VerifiabilityCategory:Wikipedia Semi-protected Project PagesCategory:Wikipedia Move-protected Project PagesDiscussion About Edits From This IP Address [n]A List Of Edits Made From This IP Address [y]View The Project Page [c]Discussion About The Content Page [t]This Page Is Protected. You Can View Its Source [e]Visit The Main Page [z]Guides To Browsing WikipediaFeatured Content – The Best Of WikipediaFind Background Information On Current EventsLoad A Random Article [x]Guidance On How To Use And Edit WikipediaFind Out About WikipediaAbout The Project, What You Can Do, Where To Find ThingsA List Of Recent Changes In The Wiki [r]List Of All English Wikipedia Pages Containing Links To This Page [j]Recent Changes In Pages Linked From This Page [k]Upload Files [u]A List Of All Special Pages [q]Wikipedia:AboutWikipedia:General Disclaimer



view link view link view link view link view link