Posted on 06/12/2023 3:33:27 PM PDT by Faith Presses On
If you ever wanted to add something to Wikipedia, but didn't know how. Maybe you even just wanted to fix a typo. Here's a brief introduction to editing on the site:
- Start small and simple, and edit what you know best. That will build your essential editing skills and your confidence. Make small edits on subjects you know very well -- such as your hometown, or something you have an interest in. You might find a small error on one of those pages, or you might be able to add a little extra information. Many Wikipedia pages can be edited without signing up for an account. If you don't have one, and the word "Edit" appears towards the top right of the page, you're free to do so. It's simple to make an account, however, and you'll be able to keep track of your edits more easily.
- When fixing a small mistake or typo on a page, simply hit "Edit" and an editing box will appear. It's made up of the article's text and its code. Locate the sentence you want to fix. To do so more easily, you can highlight the code by hitting the "Highlight Syntax" button -- it looks like a pen and is beside the word "Advanced" at the top of the editing box. Carefully find the typo you want to fix. Then put a brief note in the Edit Summary describing the change, check "Minor Edit" if you've only made a minor edit, and either hit "Show Preview" or go straight to "Publish Changes." Don't be anxious. Wikipedia editing involves a bit of trial and error.
- When making a small addition or change to the text of an article, you'll ideally want to provide a source for it. There's a simple bit of code for that. If the change you're making is found in a source that's already on the page, you might be able to easily cite that source. If you want to cite a new source not found in the article, that's not very difficult, either. There's more than one method for doing so, but one of the easiest is to simply find "Cite" at the top of the editing box, then select "Templates." From the list that pops up, select "Cite news" (you can use the others, but this form has worked the best for me). Then fill in the boxes for first and last name of the source's author, the title of the work, the date it was published (and possibly the date you accessed it), the URL (web link), and perhaps the source's publisher or the work the source is from. Doing the best you can is really all that's necessary. If all this is too difficult, you can simply copy the link and put it between two tags: . Someone else might come along after you and do the more difficult part. If you do fill in the template, you can also give your source a Ref Name. Simply give it a brief, unique name, and then anyone else who wants to add more information from your source elsewhere in the article will simply be able to cite the ref name.
For example, the Wikipedia page for doves is "Columbidae." Here's the cite for a news article, with its code. The template will automatically create it (the editor did an okay job, but didn't include either a date or the author's name):
{{Cite news|url=http://www.nationalgeographic.com/deextinction/selected-species-extinctions-since-1600/|title=Species Extinction Time Line {{!}} Animals Lost Since 1600|work=National Geographic}}
To cite the same source elsewhere in the article, all an editor would have to do is to type this:
- It's also much easier to select one small section of an article to edit rather than the whole article. It's easier to find the spot you want to change in the editing box for a section as there's far less clutter. If there's a spot you want to edit that's part of a section, you'll find the word "Edit" behind a heading or sub-heading.
- To create a Wikilink to another article in the encyclopedia, simply place the word for the article within double brackets, like so:
[[Polynesian ground dove]]
To create a Wikilink but change it slightly to fit the text, do the same, but add a vertical bar:
[[family (biology)|family]]
In the above, the text will read "family," but the link is for the "family (Biology)" page.
To bold a word, use 3 pairs of apostrophes:
'''Columbidae'''
Italics calls for two sets of apostrophes:
...while ''dove'' is an ultimately [[Proto-Germanic language|Germanic]] word that refers to the bird's diving flight.
- There's often a lot of disagreement about Wikipedia edits. Despite the notions that editing is collegiate and editors simply want to be fair, the reality is that editing is often highly competitive and editors not infrequently will try to bend the site's "rules" (called guidelines) in their own favor, and might be quite vicious in doing so. Frequent editing on Wikipedia requires a pretty thick skin.
- For disputes or discussing edits with other editors, there's the articles Talk Page. Discussions can also be held on the editor's own individual page, if one has an account. There are different venues for addressing unresolved disputes as well. Finally, there are many pages outlining the site's guidelines and policies. These are handy and a necessity for frequent editing. When disputes arise, they're often needed to justify one's edits, as well as to critique the edits of others. Probably the best page to begin with is this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Menu/Policies_and_guidelines
- That's it, for an introduction to the basics. Learning more simply requires some editing.
Wikipedia is great for sports stuff, music stuff and lists of coal plants.
Italics calls for two sets of apostrophes:
...while ‘’dove’’ is an ultimately [[Proto-Germanic language|Germanic]]
-
Those are brackets NOT apostrophes...
Thanks for the detailed discussion on Wikipedia editing, regardless of my cynical views of the nature of the website! :)
That sentence was referring to ‘’dove’’, not the information in the brackets, which was covered elsewhere.
Faith Presses On
Clueless to the fact that wikipedia has gone full leftist and locks down pages so people can’t fix their leftist propaganda about conservatives.
I remember when Wikipedia was new and a college prof. here defended it’s use by his students to me when I called it out that anyone could edit it to rewrite history or facts, so it couldn’t be used as a credible source. Some people just like to argue and would be happier on DU.
This might be for the intention of us conservatives to go into wikipedia to fix the wrongs the leftists put in.
They won’t let you. It’s a VERY large group of leftists that run a tight ship.
https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=28353
info weasels William Connolley and Kim Dabelstein Petersen were two of the chief culprits.
There is a very tight group of America hating leftists that control current topics at Wikipedia. Criticize any one of them and you will be immediately banned for life. And your IP address range will be banned also. Meaning your neighbors might be banned also. It is still great for information on the “House of Plantagenet” or the “Red Tailed Hawk”. But anything dealing with current events, forget about it.
Exactly
bump
a Wiki BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.