Wookieepedia:Attribution FAQ

The core principle of Wookieepedia:Attribution

All content on Wookieepedia must have a source that is both reliable and published; in other words, such a source must exist. If no such source exists, the content is considered unpublished analysis and should be removed. While not all content needs to be sourced, it is mandatory for direct quotations and any content that is disputed or likely to be disputed.

Does Wookieepedia not value truth?

Wookieepedia editors certainly value truth, but we acknowledge our own limitations. Our goal is to create a top-notch encyclopedia, and by requiring the use of trustworthy sources, we ensure that anyone can verify the information (and sometimes viewpoints) we present. Editors are responsible for including all major and significant minority viewpoints in articles.

The criteria for including content on Wookieepedia is whether a reliable source supports it, not whether an editor believes it to be true. Specifically, content that an editor believes to be true but cannot be supported by a reliable source should not appear on Wookieepedia. Articles should simply present statements, viewpoints, and arguments supported by reliable sources, allowing readers to determine the truth for themselves.

Source Material Types

What types of sources are typically considered unreliable?

Certain sources are generally not suitable as references on Wookieepedia; for example, because it is difficult to confirm the source's contents, author(s), or validity:

• An anonymous source refers to an unnamed individual or a work created by an author who remains unidentified. Anonymous sources are not permitted on Wookieepedia because we cannot ascertain their credibility or expertise.

• An unpublished source is material that is not publicly accessible or has only been circulated through unofficial channels or forums, lacking a clearly identified publisher. This encompasses any leaked details about upcoming Star Wars media. Unpublished sources may never serve as references on Wookieepedia.

• An outdated source is one that is no longer current or has been officially retracted or deprecated by its author(s) or publisher. It's important to note that official Star Wars works remain canon regardless of their age, unless explicitly stated otherwise. However, this obviously does not apply to unofficial, fan-created sources.

• A questionable source lacks an independent process for verifying facts or has a poor track record for accuracy. This includes gossip columns and sources primarily intended for promotion. Questionable sources should generally not be used as sources, except in articles specifically about them; see the self-publication provision of the policy.

• A self-published source refers to material, whether online or in print, that has been published by the author or by a vanity press, web hosting service, or similar entity that offers minimal to no editorial oversight. The term "self-published source" can also refer to the author of the material. Personal websites, blogs, wikis, and posts on Internet forums are considered self-published. With self-published sources, there is no independent party verifying the content; the material may not have undergone fact-checking, legal review, or peer evaluation. Therefore, self-published material is typically unacceptable as a reliable source, with certain exceptions.

What happens when a self-published source contradicts a reliable third-party source?

If a self-published source in an article about itself contradicts canon or a widely held view in reliable sources, the self-published source can be used to illustrate the author's perspective or the inaccuracy of their claims, provided it aligns with the self-publication provision of WP:ATT.

Source Reliability

Are forum posts considered reliable sources?

Posts on Internet forums are almost never considered reliable sources, because they are easily falsified or misrepresented, and many are anonymous or use pseudonyms.

An exception exists when recognized authorities on specific topics have written extensively on Internet forums, and their writings are verified by them or by other reliable sources. For instance, many Star Wars authors frequently contribute to the StarWars.com and TheForce.net forums under established usernames, and their comments are regarded as reliable expressions of their views.

Are blogs reliable sources?

Generally, no. Most blogs, particularly those hosted on blog-hosting platforms like Blogger, are self-published sources, often published under pseudonyms. They lack a fact-checking process and offer no guarantee of quality or reliability. Information from a blog may be used in an article about that blog or blogger under the self-publication provision of WP:ATT.

Blog content created by official Lucasfilm affiliates, such as Star Wars authors or Leland Chee, may be acceptable.

Are wikis reliable sources?

Wikis, including Wikipedia, Wookieepedia and others, are not considered reliable sources. However, wikis are excellent resources for finding primary and secondary sources. Many of them license content under the GFDL, which may be worth incorporating into Wookieepedia. Once imported, however, the material is subject to Wookieepedia:Attribution and Wookieepedia:Manual of Style#Perspective.

Is IRC a reliable source?

Transcripts of chatroom conversations are not reliable sources because they are unpublished, and we cannot verify the identities of the participants. Transcripts are also easily forged or altered.

However, if a Star Wars author confirms the authenticity of a transcript, it can be used. An example is a transcript of an IRC session held by TheForce.net with Jan Duursema, which revealed details about the then-new Star Wars: Legacy comic series and is used on Wookieepedia as a source in some "Behind the scenes" sections.

Providing Sources

How do I create references?

Quotations and any content that is disputed or likely to be disputed must be supported by a reliable source using an inline reference. This can take the form of a hyperlink within the text or a footnote. The level of sourcing to aim for is demonstrated by the featured articles.

Do not let complex referencing procedures deter you from adding a source: if you are unsure how to format the reference, provide as much detail as possible, and others may correct it for you. Be bold!

What should I do if a statement lacks a source?

While any edit lacking a source can be removed, the recommended approach is

When should I add tags to material lacking sources?

To summarize the appropriate use of in-line tags for material that is unsourced or poorly sourced:

When should I use prose attributions?

In many cases, it is appropriate to include prose attributions for sources. A prose attribution is the explicit assignment of a statement to a source within the article's text. For example (from the article Carth Onasi):

Prose attributions serve to distance Wookieepedia from a particular statement. Rather than implying that Wookieepedia endorses the statement, a prose attribution indicates that Wookieepedia simply acknowledges that the named source made the statement. Prose attributions should be used to introduce direct quotations and to give credit to a source. In accordance with the neutral point of view policy, they should also be used whenever a statement is controversial, disputed, widely considered false, or expresses an opinion.

The following describes the sources precisely; whether it is brilliant prose, and how much of it should be put into footnotes, are editorial decisions:

Unnecessary prose attributions can be removed for clarity; it is not essential to preface every citation of a controversial source with "according to...". Prose attributions that exaggerate the support for a position, express value judgments, or use ambiguous or unverifiable "weasel words" should be avoided (See Avoid weasel words).

No Original Research

Will rephrasing source material violate the NOR aspect of the policy?

Original writing style is encouraged; it is original ideas that are not allowed.

To avoid copyright infringement and comply with the GFDL, articles must primarily consist of original writing. However, the underlying ideas, facts, and arguments must have been previously published by a reliable source. (Information can be copied verbatim from sources licensed under the GFDL or in the public domain.)

For example, a unique summary of a plot is acceptable because it simply recaps the narrative and provides context for understanding the critical and interpretive material that the article should contain. Condensing a complex fan debate into a few paragraphs is considered good writing, not original research, as long as the debate is accurately portrayed within the constraints of a reasonable article length and the needs of a general audience.