- OckRaz
Essentials for New Users Editing Wikipedia Source
[edit]Headings use the equal sign, "=", with double equal signs bracketing a basic heading and triple for a sub heading- (eg, "Wikipedia Editing Essentials for New Users" uses double equal signs and "Headings" uses triple equal signs).
Citations can be added easily with the "Cite" function. It is the last option on the far right of the top of the editing box. This useful feature makes a once complicated activity self explanatory. Be sure to give a name to your citation (using the 'reference name' line) because it enables you to footnote multiple claims via the same source. For example if you name a citation "Smith3," and use it to source a claim at the top of the article, then you can use the same source for a different claim later on the article just by adding <ref name="Smith3"> after that claim, and both will be footnoted to the same source.
Often you'll find a claim in an article which needs some support. Add a citation needed tag. It uses the curly brackets,"{" and "}", and has the words "Citation needed" within double curly brackets.
This is how it will appear in the article: ‹The template Fake citation needed is being considered for merging.› [citation needed]
You don't need to actually type the curly brackets as there is a double curly brackets insertion tool. To find it go to the bottom of the editing box. Just below it is a drop down menu that says "Insert". Select the option, "wiki markup" and the insertion tools will appear to the right.
Ideally you should add the date so that wikipedia editors know how long an unsourced claim has been present. This aids them in deciding if the claim should be omitted altogether. You will need to use a vertical line, "|", which can be added with the same tool you used for the double curly brackets. Date your note by adding a vertical line after the word "needed" and then add "date=" followed by the month, a space, and then the year. Within the brackets it should look like this: "Citation needed|date=July 2013"
This tag is for placement after attributions to vague "authorities" such as "serious scholars", "historians say", "some researchers", "many scientists", and the like. For example:
| Markup |
Experts{{Who|{{subst:DATE}}}} agree...
|
| Visual effect |
Experts[who?] agree...
|
Use it when no specific examples of identifiable individuals from that group are named who could be used to verify the statements or beliefs attributed to the group. Preferably, the offending statement should be made more specific by identifying particular individuals and then either cited or tagged for needing citation. Similarly, the statement should be deleted if the claim about the group is sufficiently vague as to be unsupportable.
Internal Wikipedia Links
[edit]Often you will want to link an element of one article to another to allow the reader to get more information about something mentioned without cluttering wikipedia with duplications. For example, the article "Carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer" contains links to articles titled "fiber reinforced polymer," "carbon fiber," and "polymer."
This has also been simplified with the "Link" function. It is the fourth option from the left of the top of the editing box. It is represented by an icon depicting three links in a chain. Clicking on this icon opens the "Insert Link" dialogue box. Type the name of the article you want to link to in the line that says "Target Page or URL". Be sure that the "Page exists" message appears in the upper right of the dialogue box and be certain that the button that says "Internal wiki page" is selected at the bottom.
- Links to Articles with Text Other Than the Article's Title Used as the Link
Follow the same steps as above, but type the text that you want to use to link to the article in the line which says, "Text to Display".
- Links to Sections of Articles
The process is the same except that it also uses a number sign, "#", after the article title but before the section title in the line that says "Target Page or URL".
- Links to Something Other Than a Section Within an Articles
This works the same way as the link to a section except that the link will need to be anchored at the end to which you're linking. Use the double curly brackets to designate the text you wish to use as the anchor. Within the brackets add a vertical line before that text. Now, add the word, "Anchor" before the vertical line. It should be capitalized. When you're done, use the anchor text the same way you would as a section title in the "Target Page or URL" line of the link window
Areas of Special Focus
[edit]
Philosophical Positions
|
|
|
This user believes in logic.
|
|
|
|
 | This user believes in materialism, the belief that everything that exists is made of matter. |
|
|
|
Subjects That Interest Me
 | This user is interested in physics. |
|
|
|
 | This user enjoys the subject of Design. |
|
|
|
Political Ideology
| ? | This user follows their own political ideals. |
|
|
|
Dems | This user knows both major US parties have been hijacked by special interests, can no longer identify with either one, and has no hope that the situation will ever improve. | Reps |
|
Political Policy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This user believes the world would be a better place if everyone had access to a quality, free education.
|
|
Religion
|
|
|
Until proven wrong, this user does not believe in the supernatural.
|
|
Science
|
This user accepts evolution as a biological fact.
|
|
Miscellaneous
|
This user knows that American Independence occured on July 2, 1776.
|
|
| EST | This user's time zone is EST. |
|
Stuff I Like
|
|
|
This user likes the BBC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| This user watches and listens to SBS. |  |
|
|
|
Personal Observations and Miscellanea
[edit]"From the 1940s until the election of Ronald Reagan, the political parties were anything but polarized. Conservative Southern Democrats and liberal Rockefeller Republicans were important counterweights within both parties. Indeed, George Wallace justified his third-party bid for president in 1968 by saying that "there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican parties."" - Lawrence Baum and Neal Devins, "Split Definitive: For the first time in a century, the Supreme Court is divided solely by political party." in Slate, Friday, Nov. 11, 2011.
Now, the parties are practically all difference and neither are worth a dime.OckRaz talk 00:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
_-002.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
