Misplaced Pages:Relevance: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 06:33, 11 July 2007 editNewbyguesses (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users7,860 edits →What is relevance?: rephrase slite, mentioning cases that are not covered more comprehensively below← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 18:46, 18 June 2024 edit undoEmunah00 (talk \| contribs)215 edits Further explanation needed for the "strength" of an information
(268 intermediate revisions by 61 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{short description\|essay on how much a material is related to an article}}
	{{Proposed\|]<br />]}}
			{{about\|article relevance\|image relevance\|MOS:Images#Pertinence and encyclopedic nature}}
	{{Nutshell\|Material in an article should be fundamental to its subject, distinguish it from other subjects, or impact it in some way.}}
			{{essay\|cat=Misplaced Pages essays about editing\|WP:REL\|WP:RELEVANCE\|WP:RELEVANT}}
			'''Relevance''' is a measurement of the degree to which material (fact, detail or opinion) relates to the topic of an article. Degree of relevance should be taken into consideration for most decisions on whether or not to include material. This is a goal statement intended to influence the application and evolution of policies, guidelines and editorial processes, not to restate current policies and guidelines. Material that is irrelevant or ] to an article's topic can unnecessarily ], making it difficult for a reader to remain focused, and can also give the material ].

			Directness of relevance is an important measure and consideration. A careful review of the actual statement(s) in the content is required to determine this. Keep in mind that in many cases (depending on the degree of expertise and objectivity of the source with respect to the statement) the "fact" is information about what the source's "take" or opinion is on the subject rather than information about the subject. For example, "Larry said that John is lazy" is not info about John, it is info about Larry's opinion and statement, even if Larry could sometimes be considered to be a source. Following is an approach to determine and name degrees of relevance and how to utilize the results:
	Within Misplaced Pages, '''Relevance''' deals with the relation of an article's ''content'' to the article's ''subject''. For guidelines regarding the relevance of articles or subjects as a whole, see ]. For guidance on the relevance of links to outside websites, see ].
			*'''Relevance level "High"''' – The highest relevance is objective information directly about the topic of the article. "John Smith is a member of the XYZ organization" in the "John Smith" article is an example of this.
			*'''Relevance level "Medium"''' – Information that is "'''once removed'''" is less directly relevant, should receive a higher level of scrutiny and achieve higher levels in other areas (such as ], ] and strength{{Explain\|reason=What's the meaning of strength?\|date=2024-06-18}} and objectivity of the material and sourcing) before inclusion, but may still may be sufficiently relevant for inclusion. Including information about the XYZ organization in the John Smith article is a simple example of this. Another example is any substantially disputed characterization or opinion about the topic because it is info about somebody's opinion about John Smith rather than direct objective information about him. This includes situations where the opinion is expressed by a ].
			*'''Relevance level "Lower"''' – Information that is "'''twice removed'''" should usually not be included unless the other considerations described above are unusually strong. For example, in the above "John Smith" article, "Murderer Larry Jones was also a member of the XYZ organization."
			*'''Relevance level "Very low"''' – Information that is "'''three times removed'''" should not be included. For example, in the above "John Smith" article, "Murderer Larry Jones, also a member of the XYZ organization which John Smith belonged to, murdered 8 people."

		⚫	==See also==
	== What is relevance? ==
			;Related guidelines
		⚫	* ]
			* ]

			;Related policies
	''Relevance'' refers to the degree to which information is related to a subject. Some information can be critical to the understanding of a subject; other information may have a more esoteric relation to it.
			* ]
			* ]

			;Closely related essays
	], and there is little limit to the amount of information that it can hold. However, the depth of Misplaced Pages's coverage must be balanced against the readability (and ]) of its articles. An article that is dense with information that is only tenuously connected to the subject does little to inform the reader about the subject.
			* ]
			* ] – a style guideline that "sets out advice on... how to make an article clear, precise and ''relevant'' to the reader." (italics added)
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]

			Related essays
	Misplaced Pages articles should aim to provide an ''overview'' of their subject. Longer articles can offer a comprehensive overview, touching upon many facets of the subject. The longest of articles should be kept under 10,000 words or so to preserve its readability and focus (see ]); additional coverage can be provided via subarticles and links to related subjects. Articles on very general subjects should be written in ] and only contain information having a very strong connection to the subject. Articles on more specific subjects can go into far greater detail.

	Ultimately, the relevance of material in any given Misplaced Pages article is gauged by editors who contribute to that article, or to ]. Where questions of relevance are raised, these editors must work together to achieve a ] as to what belongs in the article.

	Some information falls outside the scope of Misplaced Pages's mission as an ''encyclopedia'', and can not be the basis for an article in WP. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedic reference, not an instruction manual, guidebook or textbook, nor a travel guide. ] has further information.

	== The subject of an article ==

	The subject of an article should match the article's title. An article titled ] should be about the global computer network, not about networking, software, or computers in general. When several concepts share the same name, such as "]", ] pages or templates should be used. The ] of an article should further specify the subject through a concise description.

	Sometimes an article's content will evolve beyond its original subject. If the new content duplicates other, existing articles, the content should be moved into those articles (if it is not already there). However, if the article's subject continues to be cohesive (if broader), the article can be renamed (via the ]) and its lead edited to reflect its new subject. It is usually a good idea to propose such moves on the article's ] first, however.

	== Establishing relevance ==

	Even if information is ] and specific to an article's subject, its relevance to that subject may need to be demonstrated. Relevance can usually be demonstrated by answering one of the following three questions:

	* What impact does this information have on the subject of the article?
	* Is it a fundamental property?
	* Is it a distinguishing trait?

	If a convincing argument cannot be presented that a given piece of information answers one of these questions, its relevance is uncertain, and other editors are within their rights to remove it from the article. If the information is relevant to another article, however, an attempt should be made to integrate it into that article.

	=== Relevance in subtopics ===

	Content in a subtopic should be about the subject of the article. For instance, the article on ] has a subtopic about the ]. It provides details on how the Moon impacts Earth's tides and other Earth related details as well as how Earth impacted the Moon — effected the Moon's geology. The focus remains about the Earth. If a subtopic overshadows the main subject (or digresses from it), it belongs in a new article with a short summary of the subtopic and a link to the new article in the original article — see ] and ].

	=== Impact ===

	One way to establish the relevance of a fact is to demonstrate how it has impacted the subject of the article. This impact can take many forms — including, but not limited to:

	* Causing the subject to come to public attention (i.e., increasing its ]).
	* Changing the subject's ''form'' or ''history'' (in particular, any of its ''fundamental'' or ''distinguishing'' traits).
	* Changing how the public perceives the subject.

	=== Fundamental information ===

	Ordinary traits that are needed to provide a fundamental description of the article's subject are always relevant. These facts should generally explain what the subject ''is'', what it ''does'' (or did), and what it is ] for, and should appear in the lead paragraphs (or in an ]), or in the first lines of any section to which they are most relevant.

	=== Distinguishing traits ===

	Some traits are not necessarily part of a basic description of the subject, but serve to distinguish it from other, similar subjects. These traits should be unusual for that type of subject, along the lines of "first", "most common", "one of the few", or similar distinctive claims.

	=== Context ===

	Without sufficient context, even some highly-relevant information can seem to have little importance to the subject of the article. This is especially true when disparate facts are grouped together, such as in a "Trivia" list. To improve the formatting and organization of such information, ] recommends moving it into other sections as prose, adding context where possible. Sometimes a new section (or a new, more tightly-focused list) can be created out of closely-related items. However, even when a given set of information is best organized via a structured list, an introductory paragraph may help convey its significance to the subject.

	== Connections between subjects ==

	Not every connection between two subjects needs to be mentioned in both, or even either of their articles. Incidental connections between subjects (i.e., with no demonstrable impact on either) do not need to be documented anywhere on Misplaced Pages.

	In many cases, a fact that connects two subjects may be important to one of the subjects, but not the other. This is commonly the case with creative works that are based on, or otherwise incorporate, other subjects: while the original subject often has importance to the referring work, only very famous references will register an impact on the original subject. Books, movies, and other works (such as documentaries or biographies) that are specifically ''about'' a subject are often relevant to that subject, especially if the work has influenced public perception of the subject in some way.

	Sometimes, when an article contains a large section listing connections between its subject and others, an editor may choose to split that section off into a new article. The acceptance of such articles on Misplaced Pages is uncertain; see ].

	== Relevance of biographical details ==

	Biographical subjects deserve special attention. Biographical articles are often not about ''people'', but about what brought those people to the public's attention. In this regard, there may be information that is pertinent to ''individuals'', but not to what makes them of interest. The amount of ] biographical coverage an individual has received is a good indication of what biographical details Misplaced Pages should include on that individual. ] specifies additional limitations that should be followed when writing about living indviduals.

⚫	== See also ==
	* ]		* ]
			* ]
	* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			{{Relevance and scope}}

	]		]
			]
	]
	]
⚫	]

Latest revision as of 18:46, 18 June 2024

essay on how much a material is related to an article This page is about article relevance. For image relevance, see MOS:Images § Pertinence and encyclopedic nature. Essay on editing Misplaced Pages

This is an essay.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcuts

Relevance is a measurement of the degree to which material (fact, detail or opinion) relates to the topic of an article. Degree of relevance should be taken into consideration for most decisions on whether or not to include material. This is a goal statement intended to influence the application and evolution of policies, guidelines and editorial processes, not to restate current policies and guidelines. Material that is irrelevant or out of scope to an article's topic can unnecessarily bloat an article, making it difficult for a reader to remain focused, and can also give the material undue weight.

Directness of relevance is an important measure and consideration. A careful review of the actual statement(s) in the content is required to determine this. Keep in mind that in many cases (depending on the degree of expertise and objectivity of the source with respect to the statement) the "fact" is information about what the source's "take" or opinion is on the subject rather than information about the subject. For example, "Larry said that John is lazy" is not info about John, it is info about Larry's opinion and statement, even if Larry could sometimes be considered to be a source. Following is an approach to determine and name degrees of relevance and how to utilize the results:

Relevance level "High" – The highest relevance is objective information directly about the topic of the article. "John Smith is a member of the XYZ organization" in the "John Smith" article is an example of this.
Relevance level "Medium" – Information that is "once removed" is less directly relevant, should receive a higher level of scrutiny and achieve higher levels in other areas (such as neutrality, weight and strength and objectivity of the material and sourcing) before inclusion, but may still may be sufficiently relevant for inclusion. Including information about the XYZ organization in the John Smith article is a simple example of this. Another example is any substantially disputed characterization or opinion about the topic because it is info about somebody's opinion about John Smith rather than direct objective information about him. This includes situations where the opinion is expressed by a reliable source.
Relevance level "Lower" – Information that is "twice removed" should usually not be included unless the other considerations described above are unusually strong. For example, in the above "John Smith" article, "Murderer Larry Jones was also a member of the XYZ organization."
Relevance level "Very low" – Information that is "three times removed" should not be included. For example, in the above "John Smith" article, "Murderer Larry Jones, also a member of the XYZ organization which John Smith belonged to, murdered 8 people."

v t e Relevance and scope
Policies and guidelines	What Misplaced Pages is not Notability Image relevance WP:CONTEXT (linking) WP:ONUS (verifiability does not guarantee inclusion) WP:DETAIL (levels of detail) WP:CONSPLIT (content split) WP:LISTCRITERIA (list selection criteria)
Essays	Scope Relevance WP:IRRELEVANT (content removal) WP:TOPIC (stay on topic) Relevance of content Out of scope Relevance emerges What claims of relevance are false Germane Indirect relevance is sometimes OK Notability is not relevance or reliability Exclusion Coatrack articles How to apply WP:NOR's "Directly related" principle Meaningful examples in pop culture Inclusion Content removal
See also	Template:Handling miscellanea Category:Misplaced Pages essays about notability

Latest revision as of 18:46, 18 June 2024

See also