Fallout Wiki:Referencing guidelineEdit

This page contains Nukapedia's Referencing guideline. It describes how sources of information in the Fallout universe are identified, referenced, and ultimately cited on pages.
  • Guidelines describe desired etiquette and common practice in the creation, editing and organization of articles on this wiki.
  • Any registered editor is free to edit this page to improve its readability as long as the essence of the article remains unchanged.
  • If you would like to suggest content changes or propose a new policy or guideline, please use the wiki discussion forum.
  • See the policies and guidelines page for an overview of this wiki's policies and guidelines.


See also: Wikipedia:Citing sources

In adherence to our content policy, content on Nukapedia should be based on, referenced by, and cited with sources pertaining to the Fallout universe that can be verified by any reader in an objective manner.

In the event you are unclear on any of those things, the following guidelines are here to provide supplementary instruction.

Referent sourcesEdit

See also: Wikipedia:Reference, Wikipedia:Primary source

Referent sources are linked copies or direct transcripts of primary sources of information that are referred to on pages that include related information in its scope in order for readers to be able to verify the information organized on those pages.

In regard to Fallout lore, referent sources are limited to the bounds of the fictional universe it encompasses and where it associates with reality in the form of writer commentaries and editors' discretionary insight.

Source libraryEdit

Nukapedia contains its own library of transcripts of primary sources that can be linked and referenced appropriately within its articles.

The library is freely constructed and organized by editors here in an encyclopedic fashion.

Source fidelityEdit

Nukapedia's sources were copied directly from game files using various software and user bots. Absolute fidelity should be assumed unless suspected otherwise by a comparison with the respective game itself and/or professional insight on an editor's part.

In regard to comparisons, editors should make a distinction between verifying information pertaining to Fallout lore and information pertaining to bugs present in the games' mechanics, as bugs are detailed and handled by its own policy.

Source strengthEdit

See also: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

Since Nukapedia deals with information pertaining to a fictional universe, it is critical to emphasize that no interpretation is the correct interpretation and that every source is just as strong as any other in regard to word-choice and editor discretion. In other words, all sources are neutrally powerful.

In order to convey neutrality, sources should be attributed in-text.

Ex: Chris Avellone stated in his Fallout Bibles...
Ex: Joshua Sawyer stated in a tweet...
Ex: Dick Richardson stated that China launched the first nukes.

This ensures that any contradictory information can be resolved by each reader's personal preference and indicates that all statements made are fictional and subject to individual interpretation.

The only time in-text attribution is unnecessary is when groups of sources are well defined and they -all- convey the same statement, and even then such information may be fine to not even source at all (see below).

Ex: Ghouls are caused by radiation.
Ex: FEV causes drastic mutations and sometimes death.

Source relevanceEdit

Information about a subject is relevant on the subject's page.

If a character's dialogue is the source of a particular subject, then it is relevant to note on that character's page that he/she/it has insight or thoughts on that subject.

This remains true even if the subject happens to be another character.

Referencing itselfEdit

See also: Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue, Wikipedia:You do need to cite that the sky is blue

While it may seem that these guidelines require every single claim to be cited in some way shape or form it is entirely the case. A few examples of what you don't need to cite:

Ex: The Enclave is called "The Enclave."
Ex: Humans are referred to as, "smoothskins" sometimes, usually by ghouls.

The only claims in need of referencing are character opinions, writer commentaries, information from notes and terminal entries, and popular opinions (where deemed relevant).

Basically, it's only necessary to source information that's likely to be contested, or that already is contested. Although it may seem trivial to contest information about a work of fiction, it does occur frequently in discussions about reader interpretations and can very easily happen. Your job as a referencer is to separate information from interpretation.


When users fail to distinguish between information and interpretation it becomes speculation and, here at Nukapedia, we enforce a zero-tolerance policy towards speculation. It should be noted that some of our content is derived from interpretation and exempt from speculation concerns. See: Fallout Wiki:Content policy#Behind the scenes

It is perfectly understandable to blur between the two as users both new and old do it all the time. Long-standing speculation in some of our oldest articles here is a major reason why these referencing guidelines were constructed in the first place.

In order to properly identify speculation, follow these easy steps:

  1. Is the claim incontestable? As in, could you state the claim is not true without being pedantic?
  2. Is the claim referenced somewhere? If not, can it be?
  3. Is the claim attributed to its source properly?
  4. Is the referent source of the claim verifiable? As in, does it actually state what's being claimed?
  5. Is the explanation in the footnote for a deduced claim satisfactory?

If the answer is, "No." to any of these, then it is likely speculation. Solutions vary and are left to editor discretion, but here's a rundown of a few.

  1. Attempt to reference the claim yourself.
  2. Place {{Citation needed}} directly after the claim in question but before any punctuation if you find the claim contestable and do not know of a source.
  3. Place {{Verify|type=cite|~~~~~}} to begin a verification countdown on a reference you feel doesn't verify the claim its referent to.
  4. Attempt to verify and improve footnote clarity if at all possible.
See also: Template:Speculation


Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.