Jump to content

User talk:Geekattack10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Mike Gravel presidential campaign, 2008. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Metros 21:03, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Your changes to Chinese Staff and Workers' Association

[edit]

Geekattack10, if you want to make changes to this article, you will need to provide citations. Wikipedia's policy is that every article which has facts which are or can be disputed should be cited. Citations for the statements in question are provided in the article. You may have personal knowledge of CSWA; Wikipedia, however, does not permit original research, which is to say that you can't use your own personal knowledge to change an article.

Under Wikipedia's verifiability policy,

The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. ... Any edit lacking a source may be removed...

If you wish to make a correction to the article, you should find a published source which says what you want it to say. Then you should add it to the article, and provide an inline citation. You should also then make it clear in the body of the article that there is a disagreement over what happened. As the Wiki policy says, "Where there is disagreement between sources, their views should be clearly attributed in the text."

The statements already contained in the article about the sequences of events and what happened (men with clubs, explosions, etc.) are cited with two mainstream journals. "In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers."

Because the statements are cited, and cited by two journals published by respected publishing houses, you should not remove them. If you wish to provide an alternative timeline of what happened and when, write some sentences, provide good inline citations, and let the readers judge for themselves what to believe.

Wikipedia will be better off if you do that, and your edits will be more believable and credible to readers if you follow these rules. Thanks!!! - Tim1965 02:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]