Reliable Sources in Timeline Tracer work
Wikipedia's articles are an important reference resource, the information contained is replicated and propagate in virtual and real environments. Therefore, it is vital that all articles are based on reliable published sources. These guidelines supplement the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Reliable sources with specific attention to the verification of chronology and tracing of interrupted history or chronology. The ideal source for articles would be a general or systematic review in a reputable publication, or a widely recognised standard textbook written by experts in a field.
For definitions and basics please see WP:RS
- See also: Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Types of source material and Wikipedia:No original research.
Specific issues within Timeline Tracer Scope
- Make readers aware of any uncertainty or controversy in historical lineage and mostly in interrupted historical lines. It is a good idea to review the different accepted alternatives to the interruption of lines of origin which may be included if well referenced.
- Make editors aware of missing history or chronology and its sources.
- The popular press generally does not cover origins, heritage and historical lines well. They tend to follow common acceptance or previous references in their own archives. If the press cites publications, rather than citing the newspaper article, cite their references.
- When possible, help with finding sources if the primary editors cannot within reasonable time, you can:
- Locate reliable sources reviewing articles mentioning the same reference (Use Search box)
- Locate an expert in the field between the many Wikipedians. You can do this either going to Wikipedia:Categorical index or to articles about that historical point or subject and locating experts between the contributors. Be aware of not recruiting editors who seem to be compromised in NPOV
- Mention the possibilities above to the main contributors of the article