Consumer Rights Wiki:Wiki content policies: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
added a bit of info to the NOR bit |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Attention should be paid to Wikipedia’s [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch|guidelines on word choice]]. General principles, such as avoiding the use of ‘claimed’ when it has negative connotations and opting for a neutral term like ‘stated’, remain applicable. As previously mentioned, the primary purpose of Tier 2 and 3 articles is to serve as a record and repository for evidence of anti-consumer activity. A fair and neutral approach is essential for the Wiki to be taken seriously. | Attention should be paid to Wikipedia’s [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch|guidelines on word choice]]. General principles, such as avoiding the use of ‘claimed’ when it has negative connotations and opting for a neutral term like ‘stated’, remain applicable. As previously mentioned, the primary purpose of Tier 2 and 3 articles is to serve as a record and repository for evidence of anti-consumer activity. A fair and neutral approach is essential for the Wiki to be taken seriously. | ||
==Verifiability== | ==Verifiability== | ||
{{Main|Consumer Rights Wiki:Verifiability}} | |||
Our primary deviation from Wikipedia's approach to verifiability lies in the range of acceptable sources. Modern consumer protection issues are often inadequately covered by the ‘reliable sources’ preferred by Wikipedia, necessitating an adjustment in our range of acceptable sources. | Our primary deviation from Wikipedia's approach to verifiability lies in the range of acceptable sources. Modern consumer protection issues are often inadequately covered by the ‘reliable sources’ preferred by Wikipedia, necessitating an adjustment in our range of acceptable sources. | ||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
Facts and opinions are defined as they are within Wikipedia’s NPOV guidelines. Generally, facts should come from a primary source (i.e., a party to events or a party competent to perform primary technical analysis/research on the issue), and opinions and reactions may come from the best available sources, as defined by their notability and competency. | Facts and opinions are defined as they are within Wikipedia’s NPOV guidelines. Generally, facts should come from a primary source (i.e., a party to events or a party competent to perform primary technical analysis/research on the issue), and opinions and reactions may come from the best available sources, as defined by their notability and competency. | ||
Articles, or sections of articles, which consist of Original Research should be moved to the user space of the user who has performed the research. | |||