Misplaced Pages

:Relevance emerges: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:38, 17 July 2007 editLen Raymond (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,477 editsm →What relevancy is not: grammer← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:58, 27 November 2021 edit undoJJMC89 bot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Administrators3,681,714 editsm Moving Category:Misplaced Pages neutrality essays to Category:Misplaced Pages essays about neutrality per Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Speedy 
(172 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
⚫ :''For guidelines regarding the relevance of articles or subjects as a whole, see ]. For guidance on the relevance of links to outside websites, see ]. For information on what articles are appropriate (relevant) for Misplaced Pages, see the official policy: ]. More specific guidelines for inclusion may be provided by a ] whose scope includes the article in question.''
{{Proposed|]<br />]}}


{{essay|WP:RELE}}
{{Nutshell|Content should be about the subject of the article.}}
{{Nutshell|Misplaced Pages, by its nature, is an engine for discerning relevance.}}
{{policylist}}


On Misplaced Pages, '''relevance''' is simply whether a fact is in the right article, based on whether it pertains to the article's subject. Usually this is obvious. When not obvious, relevance is decided by the editors of the article, based on what is considered likely to be useful to readers. The give and take between editors functions as a social-engine for discerning relevance. ] maintains the health of that social engine but does not itself act as an engine for discerning relevance.
⚫ :''For guidelines regarding the relevance of articles or subjects as a whole, see ]. For guidance on the relevance of links to outside websites, see ]. For information on what articles are appropriate (relevant) for Misplaced Pages, see the official policy: ].''

Relevancy is nothing more than the obvious. To make a claim of relevancy one need only show the material is about the subject of the article.


== Guiding principles == == Guiding principles ==
In Misplaced Pages, rules constrain the social environment in which editors participate so that editors remain free to determine what is relevant. There are no rules for determining what is relevant, however the below, by their obviousness, exist as guiding principles (virtual rules) for discerning relevance.


<span id="A" /><span id="ABOUT" />
=== Content must be about the subject of the article === === Content must be about the subject of the article ===
{{Shortcut|WP:REL#O|WP:REL#OBVIOUS}}


In most cases, material must simply be ''about the subject'' of the article to be relevant. In special cases, an indirect connection to the subject is also acceptable—see ], below.
Material is relevant for an article when it is ''about the subject'' of the article.<ref>Ultimately, the relevance of material in any given Misplaced Pages article is gauged, not by some policy, but by the editors who contribute to it; through ] and comments in ].</ref>


Sometimes an article's content will evolve beyond its original subject. If the new content duplicates other, existing articles, the content should be merged into one of the articles, or broken out into a separate stand-alone article. 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. Sometimes an article's content evolves beyond its original subject. If any content is relevant to other, existing, articles, the content should be moved into those articles. Alternately, a new article can be created to hold the merged content. If the article's subject expands to a broader scope, the article can be renamed (via the ]) to reflect the new scope.


=== Relevance emerges ===
<span id="C" /><span id="COMPEL" />


Ultimately, the content of articles in Misplaced Pages becomes more relevant through the give and take of editing articles. The basics:
=== Compelling argument can be made for its relevancy ===
* Determine relevance—''when not obvious''—through discussion at ]s. Comments in ] can also be useful, but are not a substitute for talk page discussion during a dispute.
{{Shortcut|WP:REL#C|WP:REL#COMPEL}}
* Even if material is specific to an article's subject, its relevance must still be demonstrated when challenged by another editor.
* The best way to establish relevance of material is to edit the article in ways that make its connection to the subject clearer.
* Always place the reason for removal of information in the edit summary.
* Move content to the appropriate article if it is not relevant to the current article.


The above rules exist at other policy and guideline pages, including: ] and ].
At its heart, a fact is relevant for an article because one or more editors can persuade other editors of its relevance (if asked to do so).<ref>The importance of this cannot be underestimated: "a fact is relevant for an article because one or more editors can persuade other editors of its relevance." With "Relevance" there is no external source to clear the cloud and a written policy is too amorphous a thing to do the job — can't address even a small portion of every possible mis-understanding and interpretation of relevancy.</ref> This persuasion is essentially an art.
* If a compelling argument cannot be made that specific material belongs in an article then other editors are free to remove it as "relevance not established".
* When removed material is relevant to another article, every attempt should be made, by the editor removing it, to integrate it into that article.


⚫ === Minor details must be appropriate ===
These offer related advice: ] and ]

<span id="R" /><span id="REACH" />

⚫ === Reach into minor details must be appropriate (serve the readers) ===
{{Shortcut|WP:REL#R|WP:REL#REACH}}
{{see|Misplaced Pages:Avoid trivia sections}} {{see|Misplaced Pages:Avoid trivia sections}}
:''Related essays: ] and ] :''Related essays: ] and ]


], and there is little limit to the amount of information that it can hold. However, information that is true and verifiable does not necessarily meet the threshold for relevance within a given article. The depth of Misplaced Pages's coverage must be balanced against the readability of its articles. When editing an article in Misplaced Pages, it is often tempting to add as much information as possible to improve the quality of content in Misplaced Pages. While this is a laudable goal, adding information that is only tenuously connected to the subject does little to inform the reader about the subject. ], and there is little limit to the amount of information it can hold. However, adding as much information as possible is not necessarily an improvement.


* Articles should be written in ]
Articles on very general subjects should be written in ] and only consider information relevant if it has a very strong connection to the subject. Articles on more specific subjects have a lower threshold for relevancy and can go into far greater detail. The particular topics and facts within an article are not each required to meet the standard of the ]. A fact may be relevant but not notable. The circumference of the ] is not notable but, although a minor detail, it ''is relevant'' for the article on the Moon.
* Articles on very general subjects should concentrate on information that is strongly connected to the general subject. Example: ] devotes a section to Removal from office, but only one or two sentences each to the impeachments of ] and ], and the resignation of ].
* Articles on very specific subjects should provide greater detail on the specific instance. Example: ] devotes a large section to ]; ] goes into greater detail still.
* Information that is only tenuously connected to the subject of the article may be ], and so does not belong in the article - though it may belong in another article. For example, the parody of Richard Nixon in ] is not mentioned in the article on ].


== What relevancy is not == == What relevance is not ==
{{main|Misplaced Pages:What claims of relevancy are false}} {{see|Misplaced Pages:What claims of relevance are false}}


Making claims of relevancy by using similar concepts like "it is important" does establish relevancy. Claiming an indirect connection is usually not sufficient either for establishing relevance. Making claims of relevance by using similar concepts like "it is important" does not establish relevance. Claiming an indirect connection is usually not sufficient either. "Relevance" should also not be confused with "notability"; topics and facts within an article are not required to meet the standards of ].

== Common exceptions ==
{{see|Misplaced Pages:Indirect relevance is sometimes OK}}

Normally, material must be directly about the subject of the article. However, two types of indirectly-related material are often acceptable:

* Facts needed to establish context for more-directly related material.
* Mentions of later works that have influenced the subject.


== See also == == See also ==
;Official policy
⚫ * ]
⚫ * ]
⚫ * ]


⚫ * ]
;Guidelines
* ] * ]
⚫ * ]
⚫ * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]

;Essays:
* ] and ] * ] and ]
* ] * ]
{{Relevance and scope}}
* ]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Relevance emerges}}
* ]
* ]


]
== Notes ==
]
<references />

Latest revision as of 07:58, 27 November 2021

For guidelines regarding the relevance of articles or subjects as a whole, see Misplaced Pages:Notability. For guidance on the relevance of links to outside websites, see Misplaced Pages:External links. For information on what articles are appropriate (relevant) for Misplaced Pages, see the official policy: Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not. More specific guidelines for inclusion may be provided by a WikiProject whose scope includes the article in question.
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.		Shortcut
This page in a nutshell: Misplaced Pages, by its nature, is an engine for discerning relevance.

On Misplaced Pages, relevance is simply whether a fact is in the right article, based on whether it pertains to the article's subject. Usually this is obvious. When not obvious, relevance is decided by the editors of the article, based on what is considered likely to be useful to readers. The give and take between editors functions as a social-engine for discerning relevance. Misplaced Pages policy maintains the health of that social engine but does not itself act as an engine for discerning relevance.

Guiding principles

In Misplaced Pages, rules constrain the social environment in which editors participate so that editors remain free to determine what is relevant. There are no rules for determining what is relevant, however the below, by their obviousness, exist as guiding principles (virtual rules) for discerning relevance.

Content must be about the subject of the article

In most cases, material must simply be about the subject of the article to be relevant. In special cases, an indirect connection to the subject is also acceptable—see common exceptions, below.

Sometimes an article's content evolves beyond its original subject. If any content is relevant to other, existing, articles, the content should be moved into those articles. Alternately, a new article can be created to hold the merged content. If the article's subject expands to a broader scope, the article can be renamed (via the move tab) to reflect the new scope.

Relevance emerges

Ultimately, the content of articles in Misplaced Pages becomes more relevant through the give and take of editing articles. The basics:

  • Determine relevance—when not obvious—through discussion at talk pages. Comments in edit summaries can also be useful, but are not a substitute for talk page discussion during a dispute.
  • Even if material is specific to an article's subject, its relevance must still be demonstrated when challenged by another editor.
  • The best way to establish relevance of material is to edit the article in ways that make its connection to the subject clearer.
  • Always place the reason for removal of information in the edit summary.
  • Move content to the appropriate article if it is not relevant to the current article.

The above rules exist at other policy and guideline pages, including: Misplaced Pages help and policies and guidelines.

Minor details must be appropriate

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Avoid trivia sections
Related essays: Misplaced Pages:"In popular culture" articles and Misplaced Pages:Handling trivia

Misplaced Pages is not a paper encyclopedia, and there is little limit to the amount of information it can hold. However, adding as much information as possible is not necessarily an improvement.

  • Articles should be written in summary style
  • Articles on very general subjects should concentrate on information that is strongly connected to the general subject. Example: President of the United States devotes a section to Removal from office, but only one or two sentences each to the impeachments of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, and the resignation of Richard Nixon.
  • Articles on very specific subjects should provide greater detail on the specific instance. Example: Richard Nixon devotes a large section to Watergate; Watergate scandal goes into greater detail still.
  • Information that is only tenuously connected to the subject of the article may be out of scope, and so does not belong in the article - though it may belong in another article. For example, the parody of Richard Nixon in The X-Presidents is not mentioned in the article on Richard Nixon.

What relevance is not

Further information: Misplaced Pages:What claims of relevance are false

Making claims of relevance by using similar concepts like "it is important" does not establish relevance. Claiming an indirect connection is usually not sufficient either. "Relevance" should also not be confused with "notability"; topics and facts within an article are not required to meet the standards of notability guidelines.

Common exceptions

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Indirect relevance is sometimes OK

Normally, material must be directly about the subject of the article. However, two types of indirectly-related material are often acceptable:

  • Facts needed to establish context for more-directly related material.
  • Mentions of later works that have influenced the subject.

See also

Relevance and scope
Policies and guidelines
Essays
See also
Categories: