4,244
edits
LPedia:Disputed or Controversial Material: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
LPedia:Disputed or Controversial Material (view source)
Revision as of 12:30, 7 March 2023
, 7 March 2023add reference to style manual section on handling potentially damaging information
mNo edit summary |
(add reference to style manual section on handling potentially damaging information) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
* Statements of personal opinion or the arguments of factions can often be found in other documents where their source or authorship is clear (e.g., newsletter articles, blogs, reports), and links or other references to those documents are a good way to make such opinions available. | * Statements of personal opinion or the arguments of factions can often be found in other documents where their source or authorship is clear (e.g., newsletter articles, blogs, reports), and links or other references to those documents are a good way to make such opinions available. | ||
* If such documents are not already available on LPedia, copies may be uploaded as articles in the Document namespace, with appropriate titles that allow a reader to understand the source. | * If such documents are not already available on LPedia, copies may be uploaded as articles in the Document namespace, with appropriate titles that allow a reader to understand the source. | ||
* If the controversy relates to information about a person that might be seen as damaging, please refer to the style manual section on [[LPedia:Manual_of_Style#Handling_of_Potentially_Damaging_Information|Handling of Potentially Damaging Information]] for additional guidance. | |||
* If a dispute is significant enough that more than a brief summary is necessary to allow a reader to understand its nature or to provide links to all the relevant source material, a separate article should be created with a title like "xxx Controversy", and a link to that article included in the main article. Even within such an article, however, authors and editors should try to avoid "taking sides"; they should present information that allows the reader to understand the contrasting viewpoints, and refrain from use of language that indicates a bias (e.g., praise of one side, or "slurs" against another). | * If a dispute is significant enough that more than a brief summary is necessary to allow a reader to understand its nature or to provide links to all the relevant source material, a separate article should be created with a title like "xxx Controversy", and a link to that article included in the main article. Even within such an article, however, authors and editors should try to avoid "taking sides"; they should present information that allows the reader to understand the contrasting viewpoints, and refrain from use of language that indicates a bias (e.g., praise of one side, or "slurs" against another). | ||
* LPedia is not designed to host ongoing debates, and should not be used as a substitute for social media discussion groups, e-mail lists, or other channels that are set up for that purpose. Even in the case of articles about disputes, material should be organized by topic, not as a back-and-forth discussion. | * LPedia is not designed to host ongoing debates, and should not be used as a substitute for social media discussion groups, e-mail lists, or other channels that are set up for that purpose. Even in the case of articles about disputes, material should be organized by topic, not as a back-and-forth discussion. | ||