Talk: Sourcing

Back to page
Wiki-shrinkable

This is the talk page for the page "Wookieepedia:Sourcing."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the page, not for discussing the topic in question. For general questions about the page's topic, please visit Wookieepedia Discussions. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

Wikipedia

This page uses content from the English Wikipedia.

The original article was at Wikipedia:Citing_sources. The list of authors can be seen in the page history. As with Wookieepedia, the text of Wikipedia is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license.

Wikipedia

This page uses content from the English Wikipedia.

The original article was at Help:Footnotes. The list of authors can be seen in the page history. As with Wookieepedia, the text of Wikipedia is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license.

Infobox referencing

I think we should allow references to be used within infoboxes, because some infobox information is not normally repeated again in the main article - especially "Height", and in some cases birth/death dates. Can we change this? --Azizlight 05:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

  • References can be used within infoboxes. I don't know if this page says otherwise, but if it does, feel free to change it. - Sikon 06:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Yeah, this page says: Undecided 1. Do not reference inside of infoboxes. Changing it now. --Azizlight 06:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

"Citation needed" tag?

Do we have a [Citation needed] tag like Wikipedia does? I think we need one. How about [Ref?] or [Source?] --Azizlight 08:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

  • {{fact}}. --Imp ATATatarismall.png 09:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Aha, thanks Imp :-) --Azizlight 09:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Appearances

If sources are already listed in an Appearances section, should those same sources be relisted as clearly Appearances are inherently primary sources themselves...--SOCLcomm 14:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

  • The "Appearances" and "Sources" lists only designate that the subject appeared (or was mentioned) in that source. The "Notes and references" list is for anything you referenced for information when writing the article. And yes, because of this, some sources are often repeated in both lists. Does that make sense? —Xwing328(Talk) 15:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Then the question is, do we go ahead and repeat the same sources?--SOCLcomm 16:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

What would someone do if they don't know a source?

What would someone do if they don't know or can't find the original source of an image? Would they just tag it with a copyrighted screenshot/fair use template? --LadyVader (talk) 01:13, August 8, 2014 (UTC)

  • If the source cannot be confirmed or is unknown, the image should not be uploaded. Supreme Emperor (talk) 04:23, August 8, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I wasn't sure.--LadyVader (talk) 12:34, August 8, 2014 (UTC)

What sources are the best?

I've been finding a lot of sources that I don't know are credible. Thanks in advance! -45.19.130.201

  • Well, I can give you some wide-ranging advice, but it's best to provide specifics about what you are looking for exactly. Our canon policy can also be of help, and joining our Discord could also help you get faster and more specific answers, short of that you can also directly contact editors, like me, via their talk page, or if you have question relating to a specific article, you should leave a comment on its talk page. Generally speaking, for in-universes information, we would only accept official documents by Disney/Lucasfilm and their partners, like Marvel, Asmodée, De Agostini, Hasbro, etc. For out-of-universe (media, people, etc), it can get be a little more open, as we often deal with information from a wide variety of sources, which means that we are more careful with those. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 14:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
    • Is Screenrant good? -45.19.130.201
      • Not really. We don't disallow editors to cite to this source, but every time someone does, it is often followed with some scrutiny, as SR is widely know for their buzz articles reusing content from all over the web, and recently they seems to have fallen into the AI trap... So if possible, it's best to find a more serious source. You could always share here the article you wanted to cite, and I could help you find an alternative. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 11:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
        • Screen Rant, as with many other online "entertainment news" websites, is only good for exclusive interviews. They are generally not very reliable. OOM 224 (he/him/they) 12:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
        • What exactly? -45.19.130.201
          • I'm not sure what you want exactly. Can you be more precise with your question? NanoLuukeCloning Facility 19:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)