3 ms·
I feel like this is probably a violation? I've edited out the first-person language and added a reference to the Wired article.
by BalinKing 5y ago
I feel like this is probably a violation? I've edited out the first-person language and added a reference to the Wired article.
- ushakov 5y agoalso he has some personal comment in the last section somebody gotta explain him Wikipedia ain't a personal blog
- tux3 5y agoIronically, had he published on his personal blog under his name and credentials, it could have been accepted as a reliable source. (Though a Wired article is even better)
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y agoWikipedia insists on secondary sources. Primary sources are not considered acceptable IIRC.
- tux3 5y agoSelf-published sources are generally not considered reliable: i.e. anyone can't just write a web page or a book and start quoting themselves on Wikipedia. That's clearly objectionable! Recognized domain experts who are routinely published in respectable journals is one of the main exceptions. Some relevant policy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self...
- lmm 5y agoYou can use primary sources. There are rules about them and a preference for secondary sources, but no blanket ban.