 | This user page or section is in a state of significant expansion or restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this user page has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. If you are the editor who added this template and you are actively editing, please be sure to replace this template with {{in use}} during the active editing session. Click on the link for template parameters to use.
This page was last edited by Jdaloner (talk | contribs) 8 years ago. (Update timer) |
Welcome to my personal sandbox, having tested the Wikipedia sandbox and various edit features including tabs and markup.
- This statement self-referential
(See also Brown, Charlie: "Peanuts", Publication name here, 12(34):56)
- This statement is neither self-referential nor accurate
- The above statement is incorrect, in that it identifies itself as non self-referential (inaccurately, since it is obviously self-referential), and asserts it isn't accurate (which is true). However, since the "nor" implies 'neither' component of the logical assertion is correct and only one of the two is incorrect, the entire statement can be classified as a 'false fact'. This can be illustrated using finite mathematics principles in a truth table.
- 'one fish' two fish red fish 'blue fish'
- According to Wiki policies, articles should have no original research[1] , references[2]
- References should not point to Wikipedia articles[3]
- One can infer references should also not be
References should be verifiable and relevant[6]
References edit
- ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
- ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources
- ^ My analyst Phil told me this.
- ^ See Circular
- ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:StrontiumDogs See section on self-reference
- ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability Verifiability