16

Like all Wikis (and indeed fansites and blogs), if someone cites wookieepedia as if it's a primary source, you should feel free to use the comments and, if needs be, the downvote button to express that real primary sources (such as book or film quotes, for example) are strongly preferred around these parts. Part of the problem is that a lot of users are ...


16

Memory Alpha is not always correct. For instance, see this question that I asked: What's the deal with "marshmelons"? Read @N_Soong's answer first and then @Richard's. (In case @N_Soong reads this: it wasn't your fault, it was Memory Alpha's!) In my own answers, I use Memory Alpha mainly as "further reading" on episodes that I refer to. ...


15

The very short answer is yes, it's perfectly acceptable to claim to have personal or insider knowledge, although you may wish to cast your upvotes and downvotes according to how credible you consider the poster and how useful you find their answer. In this instance this individual has no prior rep and is using what appears to be a throwaway account to post ...


11

One of the main issues that Potter fans face is precisely what and how you define Harry Potter "canon". In short, there have been precious few announcements by Rowling herself (or the various publishers and studios involved in publishing and adapting her works) regarding the canon status of her works, so fans (like Ibid) have taken it upon themselves to ...


11

Is it allowed? Yes. There is no requirement that answers be backed up by verifiable sources, quotations, or anything else. Answers that are impossible to understand, do not even address the question, or have other serious issues may be deleted, but mere lack of sources is not sufficient. Is it a good answer? Ideally, an answer should be backed up by ...


9

Theoretically, Memory Alpha is a Wikia, meaning anyone can write anything random there. Therefore, mere wording from MA should not be used as canon source, especially specific nuances of wording (Wikia writers on SFF topics tend to have a strong tendency to take a short phrase/fact from canon, and spin a whole wider non-supported narrative around that fact). ...


8

For me it boils down to two key factors; MA is sometimes wrong Whilst Memory Alpha is a great source of information, like all wiki-based sites it's prone to mistakes and inaccuracies. When you have a site that anyone can edit, there's nothing to stop someone from putting in their own opinions as fact. By comparison, the original scripts listed at ST-...


6

I've found that there are two main things which seem to be frowned upon citing in answers: Citing a source which isn't generally accepted here as canon. Citing a secondary source Accepted canon There is no official policy regarding Harry Potter canon that has been produced by either JK Rowling or any other offical source. In general this site seems to ...


6

1. The question asker decides what sources are acceptable The user asking the question can specify whether they're looking for concrete evidence for something. If the asker doesn't make any stipulations on what sources they're looking for, then users should be free to answer with whatever sources they may find. These sources can include wiki/wikipedia/etc. ...


6

No* wiki sources should *ever* be considered as a primary source. This includes things like Wikipedia, Wookieepedia, HP Wikia, Buffy Wikia, Marvel Cinematic Wikia, and IMDB. Talk to any educator, and you'll hear about students trying to use Wikipedia or similar sources as references for their papers. As these students are told, resources like Wikipedia ...


5

When I post answers about a specific episode, I typically link to Memory Alpha so that readers can get a quick overview/reminder of which episode that was. It's rare that I link to a script, because when I quote dialogue, I almost always bring up the episode itself and type it out then and there. Pauses in dialogue added by the actors, as well as visual ...


4

I don't answer Star Trek questions, so I can't speak for those users specifically, but I frequently answer Star Wars questions and will link to either the scripts or Wookieepedia entries as necessary. So, why would I link to an un-annotated script over Wookieepedia, or any other wiki source in some cases? Because the un-annotated script isn't subject to ...


3

The Harry Potter movies are complete garbage. Anyone caught citing them in an answer would be burned at the stake. This is a simplification. I would divide the Harry Potter franchise into these domains: The "book canon," consisting of the books and (perhaps) Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. The "film canon," consisting of the films. The "video game ...


1

Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter on en.Wikibooks is generally reliable. This is a secondary source, that is, it shouldn't create new canon, but only summarizes reference information from the existing canon in thematic form, especially information from the seven main books. It is useful because in my experience, it doesn't have the amount of made up ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible