![]() Wikipedia should not take a view on whether an event was fortunate or not. Clearly, obviously, naturally, and of course all presume too much about the reader's knowledge and perspective and often amount to verbiage. Care should be used with actually, which implies something contrary to expectations make sure this is verifiable and not just assumed. Words such as fundamentally, essentially, and basically can indicate particular interpretive viewpoints and thus should also be attributed in controversial cases. Use of adverbs such as notably and interestingly, and phrases such as it should be noted, to highlight something as particularly significant or certain without attributing that opinion, should usually be avoided so as to maintain an impartial tone. Words to watch: notably, it should be noted, arguably, interestingly, essentially, utterly, actually, clearly, absolutely, of course, without a doubt, indeed, happily, sadly, tragically, aptly, fortunately, unfortunately, untimely . ![]() The use of emphasis may turn an innocuous word into a loaded expression, so such occurrences should also be considered carefully. Quotation marks, when not marking an actual quotation, may be interpreted as " scare quotes", indicating that the writer is distancing themself from the otherwise common interpretation of the quoted expression. Misused punctuation can also have similar effects. Simply called is preferable for the first meaning detailed and attributed explanations are preferable for the others. So-called can mean commonly named, falsely named, or contentiously named, and it can be difficult to tell these apart. Words such as supposed, apparent, alleged, and purported can imply that a given point is inaccurate, although alleged and accused are appropriate when wrongdoing is asserted but undetermined, such as with people awaiting or undergoing a criminal trial when these are used, ensure that the source of the accusation is clear. Also, scare-quoting: a Yale "report" undue emphasis: ". a Baptist church" Words to watch: supposed, apparent, purported, alleged, accused, so-called . Īn article suffering from such language should be rewritten to correct the problem or, if an editor is unsure how best to make a correction, the article may be tagged with an appropriate template, such as, or similar templates to identify the problem to future readers (who may elect to fix the problem). By the mid-1970s, his songs had been covered by hundreds of other artists. Just the facts: Dylan was included in Time 's 100: The Most Important People of the Century, in which he was called "master poet, caustic social critic and intrepid, guiding spirit of the counterculture generation". Peacock example: Bob Dylan is the defining figure of the 1960s counterculture and a brilliant songwriter. Instead of making subjective proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate it. They are known as "peacock terms" by Wikipedia contributors. Words such as these are often used without attribution to promote the subject of an article, while neither imparting nor plainly summarizing verifiable information. If you do not feel you can improve the problematic wording of an article yourself, a template message can be added to draw the attention of other editors to an article needing a cleanup. The guideline does not apply to quotations, which should be faithfully reproduced from the original sources ( see Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Quotations). What matters is that articles should be well-written and be consistent with the core content policies – Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:No original research, and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Some words have specific technical meanings in some contexts and are acceptable in those contexts, e.g. If a word can be replaced by one with less potential for misunderstanding, it should be. ![]() The advice in this guideline is not limited to the examples provided and should not be applied rigidly. Strive to eliminate expressions that are flattering, disparaging, vague, clichéd, or endorsing of a particular viewpoint. ![]() There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia, but certain expressions should be used with caution because they may introduce bias. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |