Both are perfectly acceptable. Getting started implies a description of the process, Get started is a suggestion to the reader to do so, obviously to be followed by instructions.
From that point things started to get complicated. From that point things started getting complicated. From that point things started to getting complicated. Which of these sentences would be corr...
"started to get", "started getting" or "started to getting" - which is ...
A complete guide on getting started with your Sony PlayStation 5 game console, including storage space, best games, Playstation Plus & more. ...
PC Magazine: Stuck Getting Started on a Task? Get Going With These Simple Tricks
Stuck Getting Started on a Task? Get Going With These Simple Tricks
Do you or your child, teen, or young adult struggle with ADHD? If you answered yes, then you know that getting started can be the hardest part of getting a task or assignment done. Getting started is ...
In this way, how to get started would be less formal and much more conversational than how to start. Aside from the formal/informal distinction, there is a slightly different meaning between start and get started.
"To start" vs "to get started" - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange
In the given example, yes, you can replace get started on with start. I should start that sooner rather than that later. However, the two are not always interchangeable. Michael Owen Sartin wrote in a comment: There is a slight difference between 'start' and 'start on.' One can start an engine, and the engine will be running. If one starts on an engine, the implication is that he is beginning ...