# Wikipedia editors: An ethics question **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 6, 2025, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-editors-an-ethics-question/1020562 "2025-07-06T19:04:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![commasense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/commasense/32/3017_2.png) [@commasense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/commasense)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2025, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-editors-an-ethics-question/1020562/1 "2025-07-06T19:04:54Z")
I am an occasional, but far from expert, editor on Wikipedia. I understand that one is not supposed to post original research there, and that content should be properly cited with neutral sources, etc. In a certain content area that I happen to be an expert on (37 years working in the field), a Wikipedia article contains a somewhat egregious error of fact. Entirely coincidentally, I was asked to write a scholarly article on this topic that has since been published on a peer-reviewed website. Is it proper for me to edit the Wikipedia entry to correct the error by citing my own article? ---
**Author:** ![markn\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@markn\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/markn_1)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2025, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-editors-an-ethics-question/1020562/2 "2025-07-06T19:30:49Z")
The guideline is [WP:CITESELF.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Citing_yourself) It says > Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including [WP:SELFPUB](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SELFPUB), and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place [undue emphasis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UNDUE) on your work. You will be permanently identified in the [page history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Page_history) as the person who added the citation to your own work. When in doubt, defer to the community’s opinion: propose the edit on the article’s talk page and allow others to review it. However, adding numerous references to work published by yourself and none by other researchers is considered [to be a form of spamming](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:REFSPAM). I would say that citing an article you wrote yourself to correct a clear error would be ok. It would be better to cite another source, but if such a source cannot be found, your own is ok. I’m assuming the article you wrote is a [secondary source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Secondary) rather than primary; that is, it’s an analysis or interpretation of existing research or previously published material. If it’s a primary source, like new research or a report on a new experiment, that makes it less suitable. ---
**Author:** ![commasense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/commasense/32/3017_2.png) [@commasense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/commasense)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2025, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-editors-an-ethics-question/1020562/3 "2025-07-06T21:59:54Z")
Thanks, I think that answers my question. Beyond just understanding the official guidelines, I want to be sure I understand the norms and culture of Wikipedia editors. Other opinions or similar experiences are still welcome. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2025, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-editors-an-ethics-question/1020562/4 "2025-07-06T22:09:34Z")
I don’t see any problems either, especially if your article is in a peer-reviewed source, which it sounds like it is? Wikipedia’s prohibition on original research is that it doesn’t have any sort of third-party validation; it’s not much better than “My post is my cite.” Once it’s passed peer-review, or editorial review for books, etc., it’s generally considered a reliable source, as used on Wikipedia. It’s then open to be cited by anyone, including the author, provided it’s pretty much on point, as @markn_1 says. – Piper, who’s cited a couple of his own articles on relevant Wikipedia pages (and found that another editor had cited a third one, which was gratifying.) ETA: sorry, I missed your comment that it’s peer-reviewed, That sounds good. It would be useful if the website makes it clear that it’s peer-reviewed, as sometimes there are self-published blogs, which don’t meet WP’s reliable source principle.