Wikipedians Starter Course

Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia written by volunteers in hundreds of languages. Anyone can edit it. Launched in 2001, it is hosted by the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation to make knowledge freely available.

Five pillars to remember

• Encyclopedia: summarise published knowledge.
• Neutrality: represent significant views in proportion to reliable sources.
• Free content: respect copyright and reuse licences.
• Civility: treat other editors respectfully.
• No firm rules: use judgement to improve the encyclopedia—not as an excuse to ignore its principles.

Many people ask what practical steps they can take about misinformation online. One is learning to edit Wikipedia well, since it shapes what search engines and AI tools present as fact.

Anyone can edit Wikipedia. Not everyone should edit it the way they first want to. Read this before you invest another minute.

The real requirements (not the pretty version)

The honest self-check

Nobody can see your answers. Just you:

• When you read a surprising claim, do you look for where it came from?
• Can you accept "your source isn't good enough" without arguing about whether the claim is true?
• Can you let someone else have the last word on a talk page?
• Are you willing to make small, boring, useful edits before you write anything big?

A real editing session

Killer #1 — No source

Cite a reliable published source. If your addition is challenged, you must provide support; personal expertise is not a citation.

Killer #2 — Not neutral

Avoid praise or judgement such as “acclaimed” or “critics rightly argue.” Describe disputes neutrally.

Killer #3 — Conflict of interest or promotion

Connected to the subject? Disclose your connection and request changes on its talk page. See Module 5, Lesson 7.

Four more beginner mistakes (and the fix)

Ten reminders from Wikipedia 101. Modules 1–4 explain the policies behind them.

Do these before Module 1. All free, all take under 15 minutes total.

Create your Wikipedia account

An account gives you a consistent username, an editing history, a watchlist, and a user talk page.

Complete the CAPTCHA if prompted, then click Create your account. If you added an email, confirm it using the verification message.

Optional: add a user page later

Write two or three sentences, preview, then publish. You can create an editing persona with a nickname and interests—no real name, age, photo, or location needed. Choose what to share, but keep it relevant to Wikipedia and do not impersonate someone or invent credentials. Disclose relevant affiliations and paid roles.

Your tools

Bookmarks you'll use every week

Types of users — what you unlock as you go

Why can’t I edit this page?

Page protection limits editing to prevent disruption. Semi-protected pages restrict new accounts; pending changes may need review before appearing to logged-out readers. Check the protection notice and use the talk page to request a change.

Page protection explained · Colorado Libraries overview.

Three words carry the weight:

What NPOV is not

• Not "no point of view". When sources agree, say it plainly. "The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old" needs no "according to some scientists".
• Not "equal time". Fringe views aren't entitled to balance. False balance is itself a neutrality failure.
• Not a reason to remove sourced criticism. If reliable sources cover a controversy, the article covers it — in proportion.
• Not fixed by "allegedly". Hedging words don't make an unsupported claim neutral. A source does.

When sources disagree, name who holds each view and cite them. This is attribution.

The two tests

Avoid loaded wording. See Words to watch for examples:

Being neutral does not mean giving every opinion equal space. Give more attention to views that reliable sources treat as important.

What to do

• Main views: explain them most fully when reliable sources give them the strongest coverage and support.
• Other significant views: include them, with less space when sources give them less attention.
• Little-supported claims: do not add them just to show “both sides.” Some do not belong at all.

Before publishing: does your addition make a small issue look bigger than reliable sources do? Check its length, heading, and placement.

You can care about a topic. Write so that readers who disagree with you can still call it fair.

Three practical tricks

Not every sentence needs a footnote, but every factual claim needs support in published sources.

An inline citation — a footnote right after the sentence — is mandatory for:

Add citations as you write. Make clear which source supports each claim, especially material likely to be challenged.

Assess the work, author, and publisher. Prefer independent published sources with a reputation for accuracy. Module 4 explains how.

In VisualEditor (recommended)

In source mode

The same citation in wikitext looks like this. Common templates: {{cite web}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}.

The bridge opened in March 1932.<ref>{{cite news |last=Smith |first=Jane |title=Harbour Bridge opened |newspaper=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=20 March 1932 |page=1 |url=https://example.org/article |access-date=28 October 2026}}</ref>

== References ==
{{reflist}}

The threshold for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability. That produces situations that feel wrong but aren't:

Use expertise to find and summarise sources—not to publish your own conclusions. If nobody has published it, leave it out.

Things that are original research

• Your own analysis of a court ruling, a dataset, or a novel.
• A conclusion drawn from reading several studies ("the evidence shows…").
• A correction to a source based on your own knowledge or calculations.
• "I interviewed the subject" or "I work there".
• A chart or diagram you made to illustrate an unpublished idea.

Synthesis combines sourced facts into a conclusion the sources do not state. That is original research.

The difference: in the second version a source drew the conclusion and the article attributes it. In the first, the editor drew it.

Base articles mainly on secondary sources. Know these three types:

New editors sometimes over-correct and become afraid to write anything. These are all fine:

Start with academic books, reputable journals, and established news outlets. Choose sources suited to the claim; institutional publicity needs independent support.

Evaluate all three. Any one of them can make a source reliable — or unreliable — for a given claim.

Check WP:RSP for community assessments of frequently discussed sources:

Bookmark these tools for finding reliable sources.

Special cases you'll meet early

Use VisualEditor on a laptop or desktop. Start with spelling, grammar, or punctuation.

Visual vs. source

Draft longer changes in Word first. Review and add an edit summary before publishing.

Want a guided tour? The Wikipedia Adventure is an interactive tutorial that takes about an hour.

Wikipedia offers two built-in ways to find content that has already been identified as needing attention: Suggested edits and the Task Center.

Suggested edits (on your Homepage)

Open Special:Homepage. Filter Suggested edits by topic and difficulty, then choose one small task.

The Task Center

Browse the Task Center for more work: fact-checking, copy-editing, translation, and article improvement.

Before publishing — four questions

• Is the change useful?
• Is the wording neutral?
• Is the context understood?
• Is a source needed?

Then add a short edit summary.

Types of edits — improve articles by focusing on

Topic ideas — start with what you know

Pick a subject you already read about for fun. You'll spot errors and gaps faster, and you'll know where the good sources are.

Two reliable sources of things that need updating

So… what should I edit? Six go-to resources

Good first edits, in increasing order of effort

Add links that help readers understand the subject. Avoid unnecessary links.

How to add a link in VisualEditor

Important linking guidelines

Full guideline: Manual of Style / Linking.

Edit summaries

Write a short, specific edit summary so others understand your change:

Fixed typo in lead
Added citation to Guardian article for 2023 figure; removed cn tag
Updated population to 2021 census per ONS
Added sentence on 2019 merger, cited FT
Wikilinked "Edinburgh" and "Royal Society"

Leave “This is a minor edit” unticked. This is our community’s recommendation, not a Wikipedia requirement. Add a clear edit summary.

Read the revert reason and discuss it on the talk page. Do not repeatedly restore your edit: edit warring can lead to blocks.

Talk-page rules in 60 seconds

• Talk pages are for improving the article, not general discussion of the subject.
• Reply by indenting under the comment (the Reply link does this for you).
• Discuss content, not people. Assume good faith.
• The banners at the top show which WikiProjects cover the article — a good place to find editors working on similar topics.
• Someone may message your talk page — you'll see a notification at the top of the screen.

Writing about yourself, family, an employer, or a client? Disclose the connection and request changes on the talk page rather than editing directly.

You can still get the article improved. This is the route:

== Edit request: update founding date ==
{{edit COI}}
I am an employee of Example Ltd and have a conflict of interest (declared on my user page).

The article currently says the company was founded in 1998. According to the Companies House record and this Financial Times profile, it was 1996:
* https://example.org/companies-house-record
* https://example.org/ft-profile

Could an independent editor change "1998" to "1996" in the first sentence and add these as citations? Thank you. ~~~~

Read the article first. Use these five qualities to identify what needs improving.

Then look at what's underneath

• Talk page — what's been discussed or disputed? Which WikiProjects cover it, and what class is it rated?
• View history — is it actively edited, or dormant? Were recent additions reverted?
• Out of date? — check "as of" statements, population figures, "current" office-holders.

Three kinds of good topic

Build the bibliography before you write a word

Write in your own words. Copying copyrighted text without permission or a valid exception can lead to removal and blocks.

Three types of plagiarism

Close paraphrasing, illustrated

How to avoid it

• Read several sources and take notes of key concepts, not phrases, as if explaining to a friend — noting where each came from.
• Don't write with the source open in front of you. Write from your notes, then go back to the sources to check accuracy.
• Quote only when the exact words matter (a famous speech, a legal definition) — in quotation marks, with a citation. Ask: "what is my argument for quoting instead of paraphrasing?"
• Never paste an AI summary of a source: these tools rephrase while keeping structure. It may pass a plagiarism checker; it's still infringement.

Set up your drafting document

Expanding an existing article?

• Draft only the sections or paragraphs you're adding, not the whole article.
• Write from your notes, in your own words (Lesson 3), with a source marker after each sentence that needs one.
• Note which existing sentence your addition follows, so you can place it precisely later.

Drafting a new article?

Start with two paragraphs and three strong sources. Define the topic and establish notability. This is a drafting target, not a guarantee of acceptance.

Adding to an existing article

First: have you engaged the article's Talk page with the changes you intend to make? There may already be a discussion you should consider.

Creating a new article

What happens now

• Other editors may stop by, ask questions, or start changing things. That's the process, not an attack.
• You may see the page marked as "patrolled" — that's good: an experienced editor checked it and it's not spam. If it isn't marked, don't worry; the queue is long.
• If your work is removed, open a dialogue with the editor who removed it. Don't add it back until you understand why and how to fix it.
• In a few weeks, do a web search for your topic. You may be surprised at what you find.

Once your sources are collected and your plan is made, the best way to edit a live article is one small change at a time.

If you're working as a group

• Wikipedia isn't Google Docs: others' edits don't appear while you're in edit mode. If two people edit the same section at once, the second to publish gets an edit conflict and must re-apply their change.
• Safe pattern: each person takes a separate section. If you must share a section, refresh to the latest version before each edit.
• Publishing a jointly prepared update in one edit? Credit the others in the edit summary.

Reviewing someone else's draft

Review the lead, structure, balance, neutrality, and sources. Note strengths and specific improvements.

== Peer review ==
'''What works:''' The lead is clear and the structure follows similar articles. Good use of the 2019 journal article.
'''Lead:''' Doesn't yet mention the 2021 award that the body covers.
'''Balance:''' The "Criticism" section is longer than "Career" — consider trimming or expanding Career.
'''Neutrality:''' "groundbreaking" in para 2 — attribute or remove.
'''Sources:''' Ref 4 is a press release; ref 6 doesn't mention the figure it's cited for. The rest look solid.
'''Suggestion:''' Add one sentence on early life — the Guardian profile covers it. ~~~~

Did You Know?

Did You Know showcases eligible articles on the Main Page. Check its nomination rules and deadlines, then propose a short, sourced fact for review.

Knowledge equity means fair access to creating and reading knowledge. Improve Wikipedia by covering overlooked subjects with reliable sources.

Why gaps are harmful, not just incomplete

Ways to improve representation

• Look beneath the surface. Add sources authored by women, people of colour, Indigenous people, sexual and linguistic minorities, and people from the Global South — to any article on any topic.
• Link. Add links to related articles with representative content, and in "See also" and "Further reading". If you add a fact that belongs in another article too, add it there.
• Images. Who is depicted, and how? An out-of-date public-domain photo can freeze a people or place in time. Taking your own photo is the easiest way to fix it.
• Weight within an article. If an accomplished woman's biography tells her story mostly through her husband or male colleagues, the fix may be trimming as much as adding. It's not about word count.

The notability problem — and what to do about it

Sources on overlooked subjects can be harder to find. Try local newspapers, specialist journals, archives, and librarians. Reliable sources need not be online.

Write neutrally and support your additions with sources. Other editors may revise your wording.

Where to start: Women in Red · WikiProject Countering systemic bias · WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America · WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies · WikiProject Africa.

Health misinformation can cause harm. Biomedical claims need the stronger sourcing described in WP:MEDRS.

When MEDRS applies

To biomedical statements, wherever they appear. Ask: could someone use this statement to draw conclusions about their own physical or mental health? If yes, MEDRS.

Sources: the one rule that surprises everyone

Style and process

• Include the PMID in citations to PubMed-indexed sources so others can find them (it's at the bottom of the abstract).
• Follow the recommended section order for diseases, drugs, and procedures.
• No original research is especially critical here: if source A says X and source B says Y, never connect them to suggest Z.
• Post your sources on the Talk page before you write. Medical editors treat bad health content with urgency; give them a chance to review your sources first. Expect — and welcome — scrutiny.

Wikipedia’s language editions have different coverage. Translating well-sourced articles helps fill gaps.

Finding an article to translate

How to do it

Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at [[:fr:Exact name of French article]]; see its history for attribution.

Use the source language’s code: ja.wikipedia.org → :ja:. The Content Translation tool can help with setup and attribution. Review every sentence and follow the destination wiki’s translation rules before publishing.

Why: how an LLM actually works

Large language models generate plausible text from learned patterns. Fluent answers can still contain false claims or invented citations.

What AI-written text looks like (so you can spot it)

• Essay tone; a "Legacy", "Summary" or "Conclusion" section at the end
• Generalisations, broad claims, puffery ("stands as a testament to…")
• References that don't exist, or exist but don't support the sentence
• Close paraphrase of a source with the structure intact (still a copyright problem)
• Summaries that go beyond what any single source says (original research)

Where AI can help — carefully

Wikipedia's rules and guidance: AI research and finding sources

AI suggestions are research leads, not evidence. Read each source and write the text yourself; do not paste AI summaries. See Wikipedia’s research advice.

1. Open the original source yourself. Confirm that it exists and check its author, title, publisher, and publication date. AI can invent references and URLs.
2. Read and evaluate it. Check reliability and support for the exact claim. Search beyond AI suggestions so you do not miss stronger sources or significant views.
3. Write from verified sources in your own words. Cite the original publication, not the chatbot's answer or conversation link. If you cannot verify a suggested source, do not use it.
4. Check the citation details and clean the URL. Remove referral tracking, then reopen the cleaned link to confirm it still reaches the same source.

Practical URL cleanup: remove ChatGPT tracking

Link cleanup is practical advice, not an AI policy. Removing tracking does not make prohibited AI use acceptable.

Remove referral parameters such as utm_source=chatgpt.com. Keep parameters needed to open the correct source.

Raw edit count is the most visible number and the least meaningful one. These are closer to real impact:

What each tool does

Pick one for your first month. Small, specific, and checkable beats ambitious and vague.

Your editing roadmap

Use these milestones to track your progress.

Creating an account

An account gives you an editing history, a watchlist, and a user talk page.

Complete the CAPTCHA if prompted and click Create your account. Confirm your email if supplied. Your address is not public, but emailing another editor through Wikipedia reveals it to them.

A user-page introduction is optional and can wait—you can start editing without one. When ready, add your editing interests and disclose relevant affiliations. See Module 0 for tools and bookmarks.

Visual Editor vs. source editing

Edit opens VisualEditor, like a word processor. Edit source opens wikitext. Use the toolbar’s pencil icon to switch. Beginners should start with VisualEditor.

Publishing

Click Publish changes… (greyed out if nothing changed; to discard, close the tab or click Read). A dialog asks you to:

1. Summarise your edits — briefly describe what you changed. Always.
2. Minor edit checkbox — leave it unticked, as recommended by our community, even for spelling, grammar, or punctuation corrections.
3. Watch this page — tick to be notified of future edits.

Use Review your changes to see a before/after diff before publishing.

What to link and what not to: Module 5, Lesson 4.

Automatic

Manual

If lookup fails, use Cite → Manual. Choose the source type and enter its details.

Add or remove fields with the checkboxes on the left. Click Insert.

Re-use

For the same source, place your cursor, choose Cite → Re-use, and select the existing reference.

Inserting an image from Commons

Click an image to edit it. Advanced settings controls alignment, display type, and size.

Uploading your own image

For this beginner workflow, upload your own original work—not copied artwork or copyrighted characters. Open Upload, select the file, add its description and categories, then Insert.

Galleries

Choose Insert → Gallery. Add each file and caption; select an existing gallery to edit it.

Licensing and categories in depth: the Commons module.

Lists

Choose Bullet list or Numbered list. Press Enter for another item, Tab to indent, and Shift+Tab to outdent.

Tables

Choose Insert → Table. Double-click a cell to edit it. Use the Table menu for captions, rows, columns, or merging cells. Check for lost text after merging.

Categories

Open Page options (≡) → Categories. Search and select a suitable category; remove it with the trash icon. Sort keys control alphabetical placement.

Page settings

Page settings controls redirects and other page behaviour. Change these options only when needed.

Official reference: Help:VisualEditor/User guide on MediaWiki.

Wikimedia Commons stores freely licensed and public-domain media. Upload a file once and it can illustrate Wikipedia in many languages.

A free licence permits reuse, including commercial use, under its conditions. Commons accepts qualifying free licences and public-domain works. Confirm you have the rights before uploading.

Licences you'll see

Public domain — tips that save you trouble

• No copyright notice ≠ not copyrighted. A copyright notice ≠ copyrighted either ("copyfraud" exists).
• Older than the internet ≠ public domain. In the US, works published 96+ years ago are PD; elsewhere rules differ — see Help:Public domain.
• Copyright is transferable: the author being dead doesn't mean the work is free.
• Freely available ≠ free to use. Celebrity publicity shots are usually not PD.

Finding free images elsewhere

Search Openverse, Flickr, or government archives. Always check the original file’s licence and Commons eligibility.

Naming files

Names can't be changed easily after upload, so include what, where, and when. Avoid special characters.

After uploading

Check the uploaded file’s description, licence, and categories. In VisualEditor, choose Insert → Images and media, find the file, and add a relevant caption.

What role will the image serve?

Things to keep in mind

• Wikipedians are cautious about images: they won't remove good ones without reason. But be bold — if your image is higher quality or fills a gap, add it or make the swap. Done well, it's an improvement editors welcome.
• Questions about an existing image? Leave a message on the Talk page before replacing it.
• Don't overload. Images should be relevant and proportionate to the article's length — one is usually enough for a stub. Well-developed articles may use a gallery.
• Always add a caption connecting the image to the article or section, and alt text.

Lead images

The lead image appears at the top or in the infobox. Check talk-page discussions before replacing it; explain how your choice improves the article.

Guideline: Manual of Style / Images.

Add at least one relevant category to each file so others can find it. Categories also support usage tracking.

Finding the right category

Search Category:Your term and check similar files. Try alternative names before creating a category to avoid duplicates.

Adding a category

[[Category:Edinburgh Castle]]
[[Category:Photographs taken in 2024]]
[[Category:Uploaded by Wikipedians community]]

GLAMorgan uses Commons categories to report where images appear and the pageviews of those pages.

Why it matters to Wikipedia

Wikidata lets language editions share structured facts. A university’s enrolment figure can be updated once and reused wherever that item supplies the data.

Facts, not context

Wikipedia: "Marie Skłodowska Curie (7 November 1867 – 4 July 1934) was a Polish and naturalised-French physicist and chemist who conducted pioneering research on radioactivity." Wikidata expresses that as statements:

Wikipedia explains subjects in prose. Wikidata stores structured statements and connects records across databases.

Databases organise searchable information. Each Wikidata item has a unique identifier and structured statements.

Identifiers

Names can be ambiguous; unique identifiers distinguish subjects. Wikidata also identifies relationships, so software can connect a city, its country, and its status as a capital.

Linked data

Linked data connects subjects and relationships. A query can retrieve matching records—for example, cities whose recorded current mayor is a woman.

Where to learn how a property or item should be used

Check the Discussion tab for property guidance, examples, and constraints. Use it to ask about modelling choices.

What belongs in Wikidata

Wikidata has its own notability rules. Items may qualify through valid sitelinks, clearly identifiable subjects with serious public references, or a structural need connecting other items.

The ecosystem

The Wikimedia Foundation hosts the projects; Wikimedia Deutschland develops Wikidata. Independent organisations and communities provide editor training.

Editors and etiquette

Anyone who edits joins the community. Expect others to revise your work, just as you revise theirs.

• Be civil and polite, even in disagreement. Assume good faith.
• One account, one person. Speak for yourself.
• You may edit items about yourself and people you know on Wikidata — accurately, and avoiding anything controversial.
• Discuss content, not people. No personal attacks.
• Disagree with a change? Don't just revert it back — that's edit warring and can get you blocked. Talk.
• Most Wikidatans aren't native English speakers. Plain English and patience go a long way.

Where to talk

Six questions for any item

Sources on Wikidata

Conflicting values can coexist with references, qualifiers, and appropriate ranks. Preserve what each source actually says.

Other evaluation tools

Pick an item you know something about — the town you grew up in, your school, a favourite book. Your Wikipedia login works on wikidata.org.

Adding a statement

Adding a reference

Your statement says "0 references". Fix that. Click + add reference and use one of the common reference properties:

More: Help:Sources.

Which properties? Data models and Recoin

Follow your WikiProject’s data model. If none exists, inspect a similar well-developed item and check which properties apply.

Queries find records matching your criteria across Wikidata’s items.

Use SPARQL (“sparkle”) in the Wikidata Query Service. Start with an example query.

Start from an example — everyone does

The query, line by line

#Cats
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel
WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q146 .
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}

#defaultView:Map
SELECT ?city ?cityLabel ?mayor ?mayorLabel ?coord
WHERE {
  ?city wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q515 ;        # instance of (a subclass of) city
        p:P6 ?statement .                   # head of government statement
  ?statement ps:P6 ?mayor .
  FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?statement pq:P582 ?end . }   # still in office
  ?mayor wdt:P21 wd:Q6581072 .              # sex or gender: female
  ?city wdt:P625 ?coord .                   # coordinates
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}

Adapt existing queries. Useful results depend on complete, consistently modelled data.

Wikidata WikiProjects coordinate data models, properties, and missing information. Wikipedia WikiProjects focus on article content.

What you'll find on a WikiProject page

Joining

Find a WikiProject. Follow its joining instructions or introduce yourself on its Discussion page.

Contributing to the ontology

Wikidata’s structure develops through community consensus. You can:

• Propose a data model on a WikiProject's Discussion page — anyone can; describe your logic so others can follow.
• Propose a property that doesn't exist yet, specifying data type, domain, and constraints. Proposals go through community review to avoid duplicates and ensure sound formatting.
• Discuss a property's definition on its Discussion page if it doesn't express a relationship the way it should.