Talk:Steam: Difference between revisions - Consumer_Action

Line 7:

:: The reason why it violates the neutrality principle is less to do with how heavily opinionated the particular statements are, and more to do with the fact that they are being said in the wiki's voice at all. Instead of someone reading them and seeing 'the wiki says that x person says that steam is like this', they read it and see 'the wiki says that this is true'. Again I'm not 100% opposed to the wiki having editorial stances, and this might be a demonstration of how it can be done well, but there needs to be a clear separation between 'the wiki's reporting on facts and opinions from other people' and 'the wiki having an opinion on a topic', which is why I think that if it is permitted, it should be in some kind of special box or something. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 00:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::actually I'm not sure that what I said above makes complete sense in this context... might be too late at night for me to be going around having opinions on things! If I were to reconsider some of it, I'd agree with you that the main issue is the scoring aspect of it. everything else is very clearly factual and based on the content of the SSA or other steam documents.

Revision as of 00:28, 18 January 2025 edit Keith (talk \| contribs) Autoconfirmed users, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Push subscription managers, superadmin, Suppressors, Administrators 431 edits replied to kostas ← Older edit		Revision as of 00:33, 18 January 2025 edit undo Keith (talk \| contribs) Autoconfirmed users, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Push subscription managers, superadmin, Suppressors, Administrators 431 edits No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 7:		Line 7:

	:: The reason why it violates the neutrality principle is less to do with how heavily opinionated the particular statements are, and more to do with the fact that they are being said in the wiki's voice at all. Instead of someone reading them and seeing 'the wiki says that x person says that steam is like this', they read it and see 'the wiki says that this is true'. Again I'm not 100% opposed to the wiki having editorial stances, and this might be a demonstration of how it can be done well, but there needs to be a clear separation between 'the wiki's reporting on facts and opinions from other people' and 'the wiki having an opinion on a topic', which is why I think that if it is permitted, it should be in some kind of special box or something. [[User:Keith\|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith\|talk]]) 00:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)		:: The reason why it violates the neutrality principle is less to do with how heavily opinionated the particular statements are, and more to do with the fact that they are being said in the wiki's voice at all. Instead of someone reading them and seeing 'the wiki says that x person says that steam is like this', they read it and see 'the wiki says that this is true'. Again I'm not 100% opposed to the wiki having editorial stances, and this might be a demonstration of how it can be done well, but there needs to be a clear separation between 'the wiki's reporting on facts and opinions from other people' and 'the wiki having an opinion on a topic', which is why I think that if it is permitted, it should be in some kind of special box or something. [[User:Keith\|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith\|talk]]) 00:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

			::actually I'm not sure that what I said above makes complete sense in this context... might be too late at night for me to be going around having opinions on things! If I were to reconsider some of it, I'd agree with you that the main issue is the scoring aspect of it. everything else is very clearly factual and based on the content of the SSA or other steam documents.