3,679
edits
Project:Content policy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
trim fluff in P:NPOV
(trim fluff in P:NPOV) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*Information if challenged or likely to be challenged should be cited. | *Information if challenged or likely to be challenged should be cited. | ||
*''Almost'' no one can make final decisions on content display or inclusion; that requires discussion and compromise.}} | *''Almost'' no one can make final decisions on content display or inclusion; that requires discussion and compromise.}} | ||
In accordance with the [[Project:Inclusion criteria|project's scope]], the following policy lays out what types of content should be included and | In accordance with the [[Project:Inclusion criteria|project's scope]], the following policy lays out what types of content should be included and how such content should be presented. | ||
== Language == | == Language == | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
==Neutrality== | ==Neutrality== | ||
{{Shortcut|P:NPOV}} | {{Shortcut|P:NPOV}} | ||
All content must be written from a '''neutral point of view''' ('''NPOV'''), which means representing information included on the wiki fairly | All content must be written from a '''neutral point of view''' ('''NPOV'''), which means representing information included on the wiki fairly and without bias. | ||
This project aims to '''describe disputes, but not engage in them.''' The aim is to inform, not influence. Editors, while naturally having their own points of view, should strive in good faith to provide complete information and not to promote one particular point of view over another. As such, the neutral point of view does not mean the exclusion of certain points of view. It means including all points of view. Observe the following principles to achieve the level of neutrality that is appropriate. | |||
*'''Avoid stating opinions as facts.''' | *'''Avoid stating opinions as facts.''' Rather, they should be attributed in the text to particular sources, or where justified, described as widespread views, etc. For example, an article should not state that "genocide is an evil action" but may state that "genocide has been described by John So-and-so as the epitome of human evil." | ||
*'''Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts.''' If different sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements. | *'''Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts.''' If different sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements. | ||
*'''Avoid stating facts as opinions.''' Uncontested and uncontroversial factual assertions made by sources should normally be directly stated in the project's voice. | *'''Avoid stating facts as opinions.''' Uncontested and uncontroversial factual assertions made by sources should normally be directly stated in the project's voice. | ||
*'''Prefer nonjudgmental language.''' A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize | *'''Prefer nonjudgmental language.''' A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize. | ||
*'''Indicate the relative prominence of opposing views.''' Ensure that the reporting of different views on a subject adequately reflects the relative levels of support for those views and that it does not give a false impression of parity, or give undue weight to a particular view. For example, to state that "According to Simon Wiesenthal, the Holocaust was a program of extermination of the Jewish people in Germany, but David Irving disputes this analysis" would be to give apparent parity between the supermajority view and a tiny minority view by assigning each to a single activist in the field. | *'''Indicate the relative prominence of opposing views.''' Ensure that the reporting of different views on a subject adequately reflects the relative levels of support for those views and that it does not give a false impression of parity, or give undue weight to a particular view. For example, to state that "According to Simon Wiesenthal, the Holocaust was a program of extermination of the Jewish people in Germany, but David Irving disputes this analysis" would be to give apparent parity between the supermajority view and a tiny minority view by assigning each to a single activist in the field. | ||