8,916
edits
SmashWiki:Neutral point of view: Difference between revisions
This is definitely something that needs to be mentioned given recent events, especially since libel laws are a thing.
(We probably shouldn't just be linking to WP's policy...) |
(This is definitely something that needs to be mentioned given recent events, especially since libel laws are a thing.) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*'''Avoid stating contested assertions as facts'''. If a number of different viewpoints exist on an issue, treat each of these as dissenting opinions, and do not present them as facts. For instance, {{SSB4|Roy}}'s true tournament viability has been heavily contested, and as a result, both viewpoints should be treated as dissenting opinions, with neither side being presented as the "truth"; compare this with {{SSBM|Fox}}, whose true tournament viability is well-established in the current ''Melee'' metagame. | *'''Avoid stating contested assertions as facts'''. If a number of different viewpoints exist on an issue, treat each of these as dissenting opinions, and do not present them as facts. For instance, {{SSB4|Roy}}'s true tournament viability has been heavily contested, and as a result, both viewpoints should be treated as dissenting opinions, with neither side being presented as the "truth"; compare this with {{SSBM|Fox}}, whose true tournament viability is well-established in the current ''Melee'' metagame. | ||
*'''Avoid stating facts as opinions.''' Uncontested assertions that was widely supported can be made in SmashWiki's voice, provided such facts are given appropriate sourcing and wording. For instance, it would be unacceptable to merely state that {{SSBB|Meta Knight}} is the best character in ''Brawl'' without any reasoning; it would, however, be acceptable to state that Meta Knight is the most viable character in ''Brawl'' due to having numerous advantages over other characters, having the best matchup spread in the game, and having been constantly on the top of the tier list. | *'''Avoid stating facts as opinions.''' Uncontested assertions that was widely supported can be made in SmashWiki's voice, provided such facts are given appropriate sourcing and wording. For instance, it would be unacceptable to merely state that {{SSBB|Meta Knight}} is the best character in ''Brawl'' without any reasoning; it would, however, be acceptable to state that Meta Knight is the most viable character in ''Brawl'' due to having numerous advantages over other characters, having the best matchup spread in the game, and having been constantly on the top of the tier list. | ||
*'''Avoid judgemental language'''. A neutral point of view neither sympathises with nor disparages its subject or what sources may say about a subject; avoid using words such as "best", "worst", "fantastic", and "gimmicky", especially without an appropriate context or comparison. Saying that {{SSB4|Villager}} has an excellent zoning game means little and is judgemental; saying that Villager's has an excellent zoning game due to his fast and effective forward and back aerials, alongside [[Lloid Rocket]], would be acceptable. For more information, see [[SW:WORDS|our guidelines about what words to watch]]. | *'''Avoid judgemental language'''. A neutral point of view neither sympathises with nor disparages its subject or what sources may say about a subject; avoid using words such as "best", "worst", "fantastic", and "gimmicky", especially without an appropriate context or comparison. Saying that {{SSB4|Villager}} has an excellent zoning game means little and is judgemental; saying that Villager's has an excellent zoning game due to his fast and effective forward and back aerials, alongside [[Lloid Rocket]], would be acceptable. For more information, see [[SW:WORDS|our guidelines about what words to watch]]. {{clr}}When dealing with real-world controversies and allegations, they must be presented as such, and absolute claims must be avoided, even in the face of what appears to be overwhelming evidence. Controversies are to be reported on by presenting the relevant allegations levied against the parties involved, along with supporting evidence and counters. No attempts to draw conclusions in SmashWiki's voice should be made, particularly when dealing with sensitive issues. | ||
*'''Avoid giving undue prominence to certain views'''. Reporting on opinions should reflect the relative level of support they have. For instance, it is widely accepted among players that the [[tier list]] holds true and that tiers exist; while some players may oppose the concept of tiers or believe that tiers do not exist, this view is ultimately in the minority in the present day, and it should not be presented as a mainstream view or as being equal to the larger argument. | *'''Avoid giving undue prominence to certain views'''. Reporting on opinions should reflect the relative level of support they have. For instance, it is widely accepted among players that the [[tier list]] holds true and that tiers exist; while some players may oppose the concept of tiers or believe that tiers do not exist, this view is ultimately in the minority in the present day, and it should not be presented as a mainstream view or as being equal to the larger argument. | ||