Hello everyone. Just thought I'd give you all a heads up. I am an editor on Wikipiedia and have been following their WikiProject on Cryptozoology for quite some time. Unfortionately that particular Task-Force has very low (almost non-existant) expansion activity. Many articles relating to cryptids and cryptozoology are in a sad state of underdevelopment and very few articles are GA/FA status. We recently had an editor with biased leanings go in and damage the validity of a lot of articles by removing them from Cryptozoology-related categories and reworded them so that they fit with their own opinion on the subject. Most of the editors from that project are either inactive or rarely active. We need good editors that are willing to join the project and help bring articles to their fullest capacity. This means all information is well-written and properly sourced (from reliable sources). Anyone who is willing to join the project is welcome to do so.
Hello. I have recently started on a fact finding mission with a cryptozoologist from England to track and document any and all crytpid creatures around the world. Any help you need I'm sure I can find some time to lend a hand. I'm new to this whole Wiki projects game so if someone could give me a crash course in how to do it I will give you well researched information and maybe some eyewitness accounts to go along with them, only if the eye witnesses agree of course. Hit me up somewhere FB is the best place for that. Just use my email address to find me. Cheers mate
Just for clarifacation, since I've noticed that some users are using unreliable sources. All souces and information that is added to cryptozoology articles on Wikipiedia must come from a legitimate source. The best way to prove editors there is a better way of going about this topic is to do so legitimately and from a neutral standpoint. Any other questions feel free to ask me.
For starters we need to somehow expand cryptozoology articles using reliable sources that fit into the rules and regs on Wikipiedia. Unfortionately some of the users there have severely limited the sources that we are able to use, which is kind of sad as Wikipiedia is after all a resource/encyclopedia. I myself have been hounded and antagonized by one user in particular who seems to go out of their way to try and antagonize me, they also tried to use this forum post as proof of my "bias leanings". (Sighs).... Anyways I am trying to find ways of expanding those article that fits within those strict guidelines. Any help with working on those articles is much appreciated. Just feel free to ask other users what sources are acceptable before adding them (I have been asking them for a while now which sources are acceptable and have gotten no definative answer except for "acedemic" sources).