Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
User names must not mislead, or give an impression that the user is anything other than "just a user". Examples: Implies user has some formal authority or position within Wikipedia, a connected body, or as a representative of some external body; Implies user is some well-known figure, unless factually the case.
OK, never mind the fuller. It currently stands at Examples of common names that Wikipedia uses instead of a more elaborate, more formal or more scientifically precise version include: I'm certainly happy with that. The other comment suggests to me that we need to decrease the ratio of Shortened names/Other examples from 4/3 to somethink like 1/3.
John Seigenthaler, an American journalist, was the subject of a defamatory Wikipedia hoax article in May 2005. The hoax raised questions about the reliability of Wikipedia and other websites with user-generated content. Since the launch of Wikipedia in 2001, the site has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, under which anyone can edit most articles, has led to concerns ...
This guideline contains conventions on how to name Wikipedia articles about individual people. It should be read in conjunction with Wikipedia's general policy on article naming, Wikipedia:Article titles, and, for articles on living or recently deceased people, also in conjunction with the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, which explicitly also applies to article titles.
One fundamental reason is Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion #5, which includes the sentence: Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so. More practical is what Andreas lays out in quite a lot of ...
For example, if "Dr. Franz Schröder" is your real name, and you choose this to be your username, your real name and doctorate will be evident on your edits, on history pages, and (unless you change your signature) on all posts, messages, and replies that you make to talk pages and discussions.
A huge number of people - far more than ever donate (and that's totally ok!) can actually afford 20 bucks or 20 euros or 20 pounds. I don't think we want to hint that not being able to afford to give is the only acceptable reason not to give - it's just, you know, if you want to give, and you can afford to give, then please do.--
Of course, the upside of Wikipedia is that it is an encyclopedia ANYONE can edit. But the downside is that it is an encyclopedia ANYONE can edit. So, if someone wanted to, they could edit Abraham Lincoln's page to say he was a professional wrestler. For this reason, Wikipedia should be treated with caution as a research source.