User talk:ArtemisLogic

Welcome!

Hello, ArtemisLogic, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ian.thomson (talk) 04:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A summary of site policies and guidelines you need to be familiar with

"Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, use <ref>reference tags like this</ref>, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable). -- Also, introductory paragraphs usually summarize material later in the article, so make sure the info doesn't appear later in the article before removing it.
We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment). -- This means that Crystallinks.com and any other website offering "psychic readings" are not considered reliable.
Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources. Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for. In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence. -- Or confessions to forgery, in the case of the Ica stones.
Minor edits are those that add or remove little content, and mainly consists of undoing undeniable vandalism or fixing grammar, spelling, or formatting errors.

Ian.thomson (talk) 04:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Ica stones, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 06:43, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, :) ArtemisLogic (talk) 15:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]