Contents 1 Responsibility for providing citations 2 Reliable sources 2.1 What counts as a reliable source 2.2 Newspaper and magazine blogs 2.3 Reliable sources noticeboard and WP:IRS 3 Sources that are usually not reliable 3.1 Questionable sources 3.2 Self-published sources 3.3 Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves 3.4 Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it 4 Accessibility 4.1 Access to sources 4.2 Non-English sources 4.2.1 Citing non-English sources 4.2.2 Quoting non-English sources 5 Other issues 5.1 Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion 5.2 Tagging a sentence, section, or article 5.3 Exceptional claims require exceptional sources 6 Verifiability and other principles 6.1 Copyright and plagiarism 6.2 Neutrality 6.3 Notability 6.4 Original research 7 See also 8 Notes 9 Further reading


Responsibility for providing citations Policy shortcuts WP:UNSOURCED WP:CHALLENGE WP:BURDEN WP:PROVEIT "WP:PROVEIT" redirects here. For the editing tool, see Wikipedia:ProveIt. All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.[2] Attribute all quotations and any material whose verifiability is challenged or likely to be challenged to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article. Cite the source clearly and precisely (specifying page, section, or such divisions as may be appropriate). See Citing sources for details of how to do this. Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source. Whether and how quickly material should be initially removed for not having an inline citation to a reliable source depends on the material and the overall state of the article. In some cases, editors may object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references; consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step.[3] When tagging or removing material for lacking an inline citation, please state your concern that it may not be possible to find a published reliable source for the content, and therefore it may not be verifiable.[4] If you think the material is verifiable, you are encouraged to provide an inline citation yourself before considering whether to remove or tag it. Do not leave unsourced or poorly sourced material in an article if it might damage the reputation of living people[5] or existing groups, and do not move it to the talk page. You should also be aware of how the BLP policy applies to groups.


Reliable sources Policy shortcuts WP:SOURCE WP:SOURCES "WP:SOURCE" redirects here. For the <source> tag, see Wikipedia:Syntaxhighlight. For how to reference sources, see Help:Referencing for beginners. What counts as a reliable source Further information: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings: The piece of work itself (the article, book) The creator of the work (the writer, journalist) The publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press) All three can affect reliability. 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".[6] Unpublished materials are not considered reliable. Use sources that directly support the material presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. The best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments. The greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Be especially careful when sourcing content related to living people or medicine. If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science. Editors may also use material from reliable non-academic sources, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include: University-level textbooks Books published by respected publishing houses Magazines Journals Mainstream newspapers Editors may also use electronic media, subject to the same criteria. See details in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Search engine test. Newspaper and magazine blogs Policy shortcut WP:NEWSBLOG Several newspapers, magazines, and other news organizations host columns on their web sites that they call blogs. These may be acceptable sources if the writers are professionals, but use them with caution because the blog may not be subject to the news organization's normal fact-checking process.[7] If a news organization publishes an opinion piece in a blog, attribute the statement to the writer (e.g. "Jane Smith wrote..."). Never use as sources the blog comments that are left by readers. For personal or group blogs that are not reliable sources, see Self-published sources below. Reliable sources noticeboard and WP:IRS Further information: Wikipedia:Reliable sources noticeboard and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources To discuss the reliability of a specific source for a particular statement, consult the reliable sources noticeboard, which seeks to apply this policy to particular cases. For a guideline discussing the reliability of particular types of sources, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (WP:IRS). In the case of inconsistency between this policy and the WP:IRS guideline, or any other guideline related to sourcing, this policy has priority.


Sources that are usually not reliable See also: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources § Questionable and self-published sources Policy shortcuts WP:NOTRELIABLE WP:NOTRS WP:QS Questionable sources Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest.[8] Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely considered by other sources to be extremist or promotional, or that rely heavily on unsubstantiated gossip, rumor or personal opinion. Questionable sources should only be used as sources for material on themselves, such as in articles about themselves; see below. They are not suitable sources for contentious claims about others. Self-published sources Policy shortcuts WP:SPS WP:SELFPUBLISH WP:BLOGS Further information: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons § Avoid self-published sources, and Wikipedia:List of self-publishing companies Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), content farms, Internet forum postings, and social media postings, are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications.[7] Exercise caution when using such sources: if the information in question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent reliable sources.[9] Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer. Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves "WP:SOCIALMEDIA" redirects here. For the policy on what Wikipedia is not, see WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK. "WP:TWITTER" redirects here. For the external links essay, see WP:Twitter-EL. Policy shortcuts WP:ABOUTSELF WP:SELFPUB WP:TWITTER WP:SOCIALMEDIA Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim; it does not involve claims about third parties; it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source; there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and the article is not based primarily on such sources. This policy also applies to material published by the subject on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, Reddit, and Facebook. Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it Policy shortcuts WP:CIRC WP:CIRCULAR WP:REFLOOP "WP:CIRCULAR" redirects here. For links on a page that refer back to the same page, see Wikipedia:Redirect § Self-redirects. See also: WP:COPYWITHIN, Wikipedia:List of citogenesis incidents, and Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia Do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether this English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources. Also, do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources. Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly.[10] (There is also a risk of circular reference/circular reporting when using a Wikipedia article or derivative work as a source.) An exception is allowed when Wikipedia itself is being discussed in the article, which may cite an article, guideline, discussion, statistic, or other content from Wikipedia (or a sister project) to support a statement about Wikipedia. Wikipedia or the sister project is a primary source in this case, and may be used following the policy for primary sources. Any such use should avoid original research, undue emphasis on Wikipedia's role or views, and inappropriate self-reference. The article text should make it clear that the material is sourced from Wikipedia so the reader is made aware of the potential bias.


Accessibility Access to sources Policy shortcuts WP:PAYWALL WP:SOURCEACCESS See also: Wikipedia:Offline sources, Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Cost Some reliable sources may not be easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print-only source may be available only in university libraries. Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf (see WikiProject Resource Exchange). Non-English sources Policy shortcuts WP:RSUE WP:NOENG WP:NONENG See also: Wikipedia:Translators available and Wikipedia:No original research § Translations and transcriptions Citing non-English sources Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. As with sources in English, if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request that a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page.[11] (See Template:Request quotation.) Quoting non-English sources If you quote a non-English reliable source (whether in the main text or in a footnote), a translation into English should always accompany the quote. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations by Wikipedians, but translations by Wikipedians are preferred over machine translations. When using a machine translation of source material, editors should be reasonably certain that the translation is accurate and the source is appropriate. Editors should not rely upon machine translations of non-English sources in contentious articles or biographies of living people. If needed, ask an editor who can translate it for you. In articles, the original text is usually included with the translated text when translated by Wikipedians, and the translating editor is usually not cited. When quoting any material, whether in English or in some other language, be careful not to violate copyright; see the fair-use guideline.


Other issues Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion See also: WP:UNDUE, WP:PAGEDECIDE, WP:PRESERVE, and WP:SUMMARY Shortcuts WP:VNOTSUFF WP:ONUS While information must be verifiable in order to be included in an article, this does not mean that all verifiable information must be included in an article. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article, and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. Tagging a sentence, section, or article Further information: Wikipedia:Citation needed and Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles Shortcut WP:FAILEDVERIFICATION If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, you can tag a sentence with the {{citation needed}} template by writing {{cn}} or {{fact}}. There are other templates here for tagging sections or entire articles. You can also leave a note on the talk page asking for a source, or move the material to the talk page and ask for a source there. To request verification that a reference supports the text, tag it with {{verification needed}}. Material that fails verification may be tagged with {{failed verification}} or removed. When using templates to tag material, it is helpful to other editors if you explain your rationale in the template, edit summary, or on the talk page. Take special care with material about living people. Contentious material about living people that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately, not tagged or moved to the talk page. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources Policy shortcuts WP:REDFLAG WP:EXCEPTIONAL WP:EXTRAORDINARY See also: Wikipedia:Fringe theories Any exceptional claim requires multiple high-quality sources.[12] Red flags that should prompt extra caution include: surprising or apparently important claims not covered by multiple mainstream sources; challenged claims that are supported purely by primary or self-published sources or those with an apparent conflict of interest;[8] reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character, or against an interest they had previously defended; claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community, or that would significantly alter mainstream assumptions, especially in science, medicine, history, politics, and biographies of living people. This is especially true when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them.


Verifiability and other principles Copyright and plagiarism Policy shortcut WP:YTCOPYRIGHT Further information: Wikipedia:Copyright, Wikipedia:Plagiarism, Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, Wikipedia:MOS § Attribution, and Wikipedia:CITE § In-text attribution Do not plagiarize or breach copyright when using sources. Summarize source material in your own words as much as possible; when quoting or closely paraphrasing a source use an inline citation, and in-text attribution where appropriate. Do not link to any source that violates the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations. You can link to websites that display copyrighted works as long as the website has licensed the work, or uses the work in a way compliant with fair use. Knowingly directing others to material that violates copyright may be considered contributory copyright infringement. If there is reason to think a source violates copyright, do not cite it. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as Scribd or YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates copyright. Neutrality Further information: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Even when information is cited to reliable sources, you must present it with a neutral point of view (NPOV). All articles must adhere to NPOV, fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view. Tiny-minority views need not be included, except in articles devoted to them. If there is disagreement between sources, use in-text attribution: "John Smith argues that X, while Paul Jones maintains that Y," followed by an inline citation. Sources themselves do not need to maintain a neutral point of view. Indeed, many reliable sources are not neutral. Our job as editors is simply to summarize what the reliable sources say. Notability Further information: Wikipedia:Notability If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. Original research Further information: Wikipedia:No original research The "No original research" policy (NOR) is closely related to the Verifiability policy. Among its requirements are: All material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source. This means that a source must exist for it, whether or not it is cited in the article. Sources must support the material clearly and directly: drawing inferences from multiple sources to advance a novel position is prohibited by the NOR policy.[11] Base articles largely on reliable secondary sources. While primary sources are appropriate in some cases, relying on them can be problematic. For more information, see the Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources section of the NOR policy, and the Misuse of primary sources section of the BLP policy.


See also Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine), a guideline Wikipedia:List of free online resources Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange Wikipedia:Core content policies Related essays Wikipedia:Citation clutter Wikipedia:How to mine a source Wikipedia:Improving referencing efforts Wikipedia:Use of tertiary sources Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth Wikipedia:Video links Wikipedia:When to cite


Notes ^ This principle was previously expressed on this policy page as "the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth." See the essay, WP:Verifiability, not truth. ^ Once an editor has provided any source that he or she believes, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material has an obligation to articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from Wikipedia (e.g., undue emphasis on a minor point, unencyclopedic content, etc.). All editors are then expected to help achieve consensus, and any problems with the text or sourcing should be fixed before the material is added back. ^ It may be that the article contains so few citations that it is impractical to add specific citation needed tags, in which case consider tagging a section with {{unreferencedsection}}, or the article with {{refimprove}} or {{unreferenced}}. In the case of a disputed category or on a disambiguation page, consider asking for a citation on the talk page. ^ When tagging or removing such material, please keep in mind that such edits can be easily misunderstood. Some editors object to others making chronic, frequent, and large-scale deletions of unsourced information, especially if unaccompanied by other efforts to improve the material. Do not concentrate only on material of a particular POV, as that may result in accusations that you are in violation of WP:NPOV. Also check to see whether the material is sourced to a citation elsewhere on the page. For all of these reasons, it is advisable to communicate clearly that you have a considered reason to believe that the material in question cannot be verified. ^ Wales, Jimmy. "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information", WikiEN-l, May 16, 2006: "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons." ^ This includes material such as documents in publicly accessible archives, inscriptions on monuments, gravestones, etc., that are available for anyone to see. ^ a b Please do note that any exceptional claim would require exceptional sources. ^ a b Sources that may have interests other than professional considerations in the matter being reported are considered to be conflicted sources. Further examples of sources with conflicts of interest include but are not limited to articles by any media group that promote the holding company of the media group or discredit its competitors; news reports by journalists having financial interests in the companies being reported or in their competitors; material (including but not limited to news reports, books, articles and other publications) involved in or struck down by litigation in any country, or released by parties involved in litigation against other involved parties, during, before or after the litigation; and promotional material released through media in the form of paid news reports. For definitions of sources with conflict of interest: The Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and Learning, Columbia University mentions: "A conflict of interest involves the abuse – actual, apparent, or potential – of the trust that people have in professionals. The simplest working definition states: A conflict of interest is a situation in which financial or other personal considerations have the potential to compromise or bias professional judgment and objectivity. An apparent conflict of interest is one in which a reasonable person would think that the professional's judgment is likely to be compromised. A potential conflict of interest involves a situation that may develop into an actual conflict of interest. It is important to note that a conflict of interest exists whether or not decisions are affected by a personal interest; a conflict of interest implies only the potential for bias, not a likelihood. It is also important to note that a conflict of interest is not considered misconduct in research, since the definition for misconduct is currently limited to fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism." The New York Times Company forwards this understanding: "Conflicts of interest, real or apparent, may come up in many areas. They may involve the relationships of staff members with readers, news sources, advocacy groups, advertisers, or competitors; with one another, or with the newspaper or its parent company. And at a time when two-career families are the norm, the civic and professional activities of spouses, family and companions can create conflicts or the appearance of conflicts." ^ Self-published material is characterized by the lack of independent reviewers (those without a conflict of interest) validating the reliability of content. Further examples of self-published sources include press releases, material contained within company websites, advertising campaigns, material published in media by the owner(s)/publisher(s) of the media group, self-released music albums and electoral manifestos: The University of California, Berkeley library states: "Most pages found in general search engines for the web are self-published or published by businesses small and large with motives to get you to buy something or believe a point of view. Even within university and library web sites, there can be many pages that the institution does not try to oversee." Princeton University offers this understanding in its publication, Academic Integrity at Princeton (2011): "Unlike most books and journal articles, which undergo strict editorial review before publication, much of the information on the Web is self-published. To be sure, there are many websites in which you can have confidence: mainstream newspapers, refereed electronic journals, and university, library, and government collections of data. But for vast amounts of Web-based information, no impartial reviewers have evaluated the accuracy or fairness of such material before it's made instantly available across the globe." The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition[dead link] states, "any Internet site that does not have a specific publisher or sponsoring body should be treated as unpublished or self-published work." ^ Rekdal, Ole Bjørn (1 August 2014). "Academic urban legends". Social Studies of Science. 44 (4): 638–654. doi:10.1177/0306312714535679. ISSN 0306-3127. Retrieved 30 April 2016.  ^ a b When there is dispute about whether a piece of text is fully supported by a given source, direct quotes and other relevant details from the source should be provided to other editors as a courtesy. Do not violate the source's copyright when doing so. ^ Hume, David. An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, Forgotten Books, 1984, pp. 82, 86; first published in 1748 as Philosophical enquiries concerning human Understanding, (or the Oxford 1894 edition OL 7067396M at para. 91) "A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence. ... That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavours to establish; and even in that case there is a mutual destruction of arguments, and the superior only gives us an assurance suitable to that degree of force, which remains, after deducting the inferior." In the 18th century, Pierre-Simon Laplace reformulated the idea as "The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness." Marcello Truzzi recast it again, in 1978, as "An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof." Carl Sagan, finally, popularized the concept broadly as "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" in 1980 on Cosmos: A Personal Voyage; this was the formulation originally used on Wikipedia.


Further reading Wales, Jimmy. "Insist on sources", WikiEN-l, July 19, 2006: "I really want to encourage a much stronger culture which says: it is better to have no information, than to have information like this, with no sources."—referring to a rather unlikely statement about the founders of Google throwing pies at each other. v t e Wikipedia referencing Policies and guidelines Verifiability Biographies of living persons Identifying reliable sources Medicine Citing sources Scientific citations General advice Citation needed Find sources Combining sources Offline sources Referencing styles Citing sources Citation Style 1 Citation Style 2 Citation Style Vancouver LSA Comics Citation templates Reflist template Inline citations Footnotes Parenthetical referencing Punctuation and footnotes Shortened footnotes Nesting footnotes Help for beginners Reference-tags Citations quick reference Introduction to referencing Referencing with citation templates Referencing without using templates Referencing dos and don'ts Citing Wikipedia Advanced help Cite link labels Citation tools Cite errors Cite messages Converting between references formats Reference display customization References and page numbers Template documentation {{Edit refs}} {{Refref}} {{Refref2}} {{Refstart}} 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 Autobiography Image use Wikipedia is not a dictionary Article titles Notability 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:Verifiability&oldid=812879367" Categories: Wikipedia policiesWikipedia content policiesWikipedia verifiability


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 Wikiversity Languages Afrikaansالعربيةঅসমীয়াAsturianuAzərbaycancaবাংলাБеларускаяभोजपुरीБългарскиCatalàČeštinaCymraegDanskDeutschEestiΕλληνικάEspañolEsperantoفارسیFrançaisGalegoگیلکیગુજરાતી한국어Հայերենहिन्दीHrvatskiIlokanoBahasa IndonesiaInterlinguaÍslenskaItalianoಕನ್ನಡქართულიҚазақшаLatinaLietuviųMagyarМакедонскиമലയാളംBahasa MelayuNederlandsनेपाली日本語NapulitanoNorskଓଡ଼ିଆپښتوPolskiPortuguêsRomânăРусиньскыйРусскийShqipSicilianuසිංහලSimple EnglishسنڌيSlovenčinaSlovenščinaکوردیСрпски / srpskiSuomiSvenskaதமிழ்Татарча/tatarçaతెలుగుไทยТоҷикӣTürkçeУкраїнськаاردوTiếng Việtייִדיש粵語中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 30 November 2017, at 12:08. 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":"0.416","walltime":"0.533","ppvisitednodes":{"value":3882,"limit":1000000},"ppgeneratednodes":{"value":0,"limit":1500000},"postexpandincludesize":{"value":139896,"limit":2097152},"templateargumentsize":{"value":3848,"limit":2097152},"expansiondepth":{"value":9,"limit":40},"expensivefunctioncount":{"value":35,"limit":500},"entityaccesscount":{"value":0,"limit":400},"timingprofile":["100.00% 434.381 1 -total"," 32.46% 141.003 11 Template:Policy_shortcut"," 22.61% 98.211 11 Template:Bulleted_list"," 20.89% 90.745 1 Template:Reflist"," 14.37% 62.399 29 Template:No_redirect"," 11.02% 47.870 1 Template:Policy"," 10.36% 45.021 1 Template:Ombox"," 8.98% 39.014 1 Template:Cite_journal"," 8.77% 38.115 9 Template:Navbox"," 8.02% 34.822 11 Template:For_nowiki"]},"scribunto":{"limitreport-timeusage":{"value":"0.185","limit":"10.000"},"limitreport-memusage":{"value":3758882,"limit":52428800}},"cachereport":{"origin":"mw1257","timestamp":"20171209201230","ttl":1900800,"transientcontent":false}}});});(window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgBackendResponseTime":71,"wgHostname":"mw1252"});});


Wikipedia:Verifiability - Photos and All Basic Informations

Wikipedia:Verifiability More Links

Wikipedia:Reliable Sources/NoticeboardWikipedia:VDWikipedia:VECTORWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:What "Ignore All Rules" MeansWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:INCITEWikipedia:Core Content PoliciesWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:Content PoliciesWikipedia:Article TitlesWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Image Use PolicyWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotTemplate:Content Policy ListTemplate Talk:Content Policy ListWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:MainspaceWikipedia:INCITEWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:CopyrightWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:ProveItWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Citation NeededWikipedia:PRESERVEWikipedia:BLPWikipedia:BLPWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:SyntaxhighlightHelp:Referencing For BeginnersWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesRandom HouseCambridge University PressWikipedia:Third-party SourcesWikipedia:BLPWikipedia:MEDRSWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Search Engine TestWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:PRIMARYBlogWikipedia:PRIMARYWikipedia:Reliable Sources NoticeboardWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Reliable Sources/NoticeboardWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:IRSWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:List Of Self-publishing CompaniesPersonal Web PageSelf-publishingWikipedia:Expert EditorsContent FarmInternet ForumSocial MediaWikipedia:RSWikipedia:NOTSOCIALNETWORKWikipedia:Twitter-ELWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:VerifiabilityTwitterTumblrRedditFacebookWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:RedirectWikipedia:COPYWITHINWikipedia:List Of Citogenesis IncidentsWikipedia:Citing WikipediaWikipedia:Mirrors And ForksWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesCircular ReferenceCircular ReportingPrimary SourceWikipedia:PRIMARYWikipedia:ORWikipedia:UNDUEWikipedia:Manual Of Style/Self-references To AvoidWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Offline SourcesWikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource RequestWikipedia:Reliable Sources/CostWikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource RequestWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Translators AvailableWikipedia:No Original ResearchEnglish WikipediaTemplate:Request QuotationWikipedia:Copyright ViolationsWikipedia:Fair UseWikipedia:UNDUEWikipedia:PAGEDECIDEWikipedia:PRESERVEWikipedia:SUMMARYWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:ConsensusWikipedia:PRESERVEWikipedia:Citation NeededWikipedia:Template Messages/Sources Of ArticlesWikipedia:ShortcutTemplate:Citation NeededTemplate:CnTemplate:FactWikipedia:Template Messages/CleanupHelp:Talk PageTemplate:Verification NeededTemplate:Failed VerificationWikipedia:BLPWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Fringe TheoriesRed Flag (idiom)Wikipedia:PrimaryConspiracy TheoryWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:CopyrightWikipedia:PlagiarismWikipedia:Copying Within WikipediaWikipedia:MOSWikipedia:CITEWikipedia:INCITEWikipedia:INTEXTWikipedia:CopyrightsContributory Copyright InfringementScribdYouTubeWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:RSWikipedia:NPOVWikipedia:UNDUEWikipedia:INTEXTWikipedia:INCITEWikipedia:NotabilityWikipedia:Third-party SourcesWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:SYNSecondary SourcePrimary SourceWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:BLPWikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources (medicine)Wikipedia:List Of Free Online ResourcesWikipedia:Template Messages/Sources Of ArticlesWikipedia:Wikipedia Is Not A Reliable SourceWikipedia:WikiProject Fact And Reference CheckWikipedia:WikiProject Resource ExchangeWikipedia:Core Content PoliciesWikipedia:Citation ClutterWikipedia:How To Mine A SourceWikipedia:Improving Referencing EffortsWikipedia:Use Of Tertiary SourcesWikipedia:Verifiability, Not TruthWikipedia:Video LinksWikipedia:When To CiteWikipedia:Verifiability, Not TruthWikipedia:DUEWikipedia:NOTWikipedia:CONSENSUSWikipedia:Citation NeededTemplate:UnreferencedsectionTemplate:RefimproveTemplate:UnreferencedWikipedia:NPOVJimmy WalesManifestoWikipedia:Link RotDigital Object IdentifierInternational Standard Serial NumberDavid HumeOpen LibraryPierre-Simon LaplaceMarcello TruzziCarl SaganCosmos: A Personal VoyageTemplate:Wikipedia ReferencingTemplate Talk:Wikipedia ReferencingWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:Identifying Reliable SourcesWikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources (medicine)Wikipedia:Citing SourcesWikipedia:Scientific Citation GuidelinesWikipedia:Citation NeededHelp:Find SourcesWikipedia:Combining SourcesWikipedia:Offline SourcesHelp:Overview Of Referencing StylesWikipedia:Citing SourcesHelp:Citation Style 1Help:Citation Style 2Help:Citation Style VancouverCategory:LSA Style Citation TemplatesCategory:Comics Citation TemplatesWikipedia:Citation TemplatesTemplate:ReflistWikipedia:Inline CitationHelp:FootnotesWikipedia:Parenthetical ReferencingMOS:PUNCTFOOTHelp:Shortened FootnotesWikipedia:Nesting FootnotesHelp:Referencing For BeginnersHelp:ReftagsHelp:Citations Quick ReferenceHelp:Introduction To Referencing/1Help:Referencing For Beginners With Citation TemplatesHelp:Referencing For Beginners Without Using TemplatesWikipedia:References Dos And Don'tsWikipedia:Citing WikipediaHelp:Cite Link LabelsHelp:Citation ToolsHelp:Cite ErrorsHelp:Cite MessagesHelp:Converting Between References FormatsHelp:Reference Display CustomizationHelp:References And Page NumbersTemplate:Edit RefsTemplate:RefrefTemplate:Refref2Template:RefstartTemplate:Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesTemplate Talk:Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Five PillarsWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:Ignore All RulesWikipedia:No Original ResearchWikipedia:Neutral Point Of ViewWikipedia:What Wikipedia Is NotWikipedia:Biographies Of Living PersonsWikipedia:AutobiographyWikipedia:Image Use PolicyWikipedia:Wikipedia Is Not A DictionaryWikipedia:Article TitlesWikipedia:NotabilityWikipedia: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 VerifiabilityDiscussion 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