Invite to Research Survey
I'm part of a team that is researching ways to help Wikipedia editors find interesting content to contribute to Wikipedia. More specifically, we are investigating whether content from news sources can be used to enhance Wikipedia editing. We are creating a tool, called wikiFeed, that will help Wikipedia editors make connections between content from Twitter or RSS news feeds and Wikipedia articles. We are currently gathering data which will help us in the development process and would love to learn about how you consume news content and how it relates to your Wikipedia editing. If you would like to help, follow this link to complete a brief survey. Your feedback will help us create a better tool.
For more information about wikiFeed, visit our project page. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask via my talk page, or by email at firstname.lastname@example.org. Thanks for your time! MarchionessGrey (talk) 15:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, please don't copy/paste content from a source into Wikipedia the way you did here. The bulk of the content you inserted is almost verbatim with that of the source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations seriously and this sort of thing is grounds for having your account permanently blocked. We are allowed to use quotations sparingly, if they are properly formatted and attributed, so that it is obvious that we are not passing off the content as original. I have reverted your edit for this reason, but also because the content you submitted as factual is explicitly described as a rumor in the source. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:10, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
- I belong to the part of the world where the specific article you mentioned has significance and I do make sure that whatever I write is nothing but fact. About the inserted content being in verbatim with that of the source I do agree that I forgot to quote the text. No comments about the edit in the specific page since I know what's true and what's not , about that movie, being a part of the crew. So about the reason you mentioned as " the content you submitted as factual is explicitly described as a rumor in the source", dear friend I know what's fact and what's not. I'm a part of the specific movie under question.
- Good luck with your findings.
- Hi, I understand your perspective, but Wikipedia is not interested in what you personally know to be a fact. The community considers that original research, which contravenes Wikipedia policy. We don't, for example, allow doctors to add their personal observations to articles. Their observations must be published in reliable sources. Facts must be verifiable to be included. Since nobody can go to a library to double-check your knowledge, the content, presented as fact is not verifiable. Wikipedia requires content be sourced in reliable, secondary, independent published sources. Hope that helps to explain community expectations a little better. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, With all due respect to the so called need for original research, the previous version of the content I edited was far from 'original research' . The link quoted and the content specified have no connection with each other. Please note that the content you reverted has the same 'copy/paste' issue. Dare to check ? "Jeethu has always wanted to do a project with Mohanlal and jumped at the chance after "Memories". Check reference number 11 if you could and report if you really care. Regards