| Revision as of 23:41, 3 January 2008 editNapoliRoma (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,280 edits →Don't hide the important facts: disparage -> underplay; a better word for the implied eschewed behavior: "the Pacific is an ocean", not "The Pacific is a sucky ocean"← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:40, 3 March 2020 edit undo1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers197,845 edits Modifying redirect categories using Capricorn ♑ |
| (223 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
#REDIRECT ] |
|
{{style-guideline|WP:PEACOCK|WP:APT|WP:PCK|WP:PEA}} |
|
|
{{Guideline in a nutshell|Instead of ''telling'' the reader that a subject is important, use facts to ''show'' the subject's importance.}} |
|
|
In ] articles, try to avoid '''peacock terms''' that merely show off the subject of the article without imparting real information. '''Peacock terms''' often reflect unqualified opinion, and usually do not help establish the importance of an article. They should be especially avoided in the ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Redirect category shell| |
|
== Examples == |
|
|
|
{{R from merge}} |
|
Consider the following examples. Which do you think is more interesting to read? |
|
|
|
{{R to project namespace}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{R to section}} |
|
===Duke of Omnium=== |
|
|
|
{{R from shortcut}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{R to subpage}} |
|
'''Peacock term:''' |
|
|
|
}} |
|
:'''''William Peckenridge, 1st Duke of Omnium''' (]? - ], ]) is considered, by many people, to be the most important man ever to carry that title.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Better:''' |
|
|
:'''''William Peckenridge, 1st Duke of Omnium''' (]? - ], ]) was personal counselor to ], royalist general in the ], a ], ], and the director of the secret society known as ]. He expanded his family's possessions to include the proprietorship of the Province of ] and the hereditary Lord High Bailiffship of Guernsey and Sark.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first example simply ''tells'' the reader that the Duke of Omnium was important. The second example ''shows'' the reader how he was important, without directly saying so. ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
===Brazilian economy=== |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Peacock term:''' |
|
|
:''Brazil has a vigorous economy.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Better:''' |
|
|
:''According to the ] and the ], Brazil has the ] economy in the world by ] (PPP)<ref>{{cite web | title =World Economic Outlook Database | quote =Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) valuation of country GDP | publisher =International Monetary Fund | date =] | url = http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2007/01/data/weorept.aspx?sy=2005&ey=2005&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=512%2C941%2C914%2C446%2C612%2C666%2C614%2C668%2C311%2C672%2C213%2C946%2C911%2C137%2C193%2C962%2C122%2C674%2C912%2C676%2C313%2C548%2C419%2C556%2C513%2C678%2C316%2C181%2C913%2C682%2C124%2C684%2C339%2C273%2C638%2C921%2C514%2C948%2C218%2C686%2C963%2C688%2C616%2C518%2C223%2C728%2C516%2C558%2C918%2C138%2C748%2C196%2C618%2C278%2C522%2C692%2C622%2C694%2C156%2C142%2C624%2C449%2C626%2C564%2C628%2C283%2C228%2C853%2C924%2C288%2C233%2C293%2C632%2C566%2C636%2C964%2C634%2C182%2C238%2C453%2C662%2C968%2C960%2C922%2C423%2C714%2C935%2C862%2C128%2C716%2C611%2C456%2C321%2C722%2C243%2C965%2C248%2C718%2C469%2C724%2C253%2C576%2C642%2C936%2C643%2C961%2C939%2C813%2C644%2C199%2C819%2C184%2C172%2C524%2C132%2C361%2C646%2C362%2C648%2C364%2C915%2C732%2C134%2C366%2C652%2C734%2C174%2C144%2C328%2C146%2C258%2C463%2C656%2C528%2C654%2C923%2C336%2C738%2C263%2C578%2C268%2C537%2C532%2C742%2C944%2C866%2C176%2C369%2C534%2C744%2C536%2C186%2C429%2C925%2C178%2C746%2C436%2C926%2C136%2C466%2C343%2C112%2C158%2C111%2C439%2C298%2C916%2C927%2C664%2C846%2C826%2C299%2C542%2C582%2C443%2C474%2C917%2C754%2C544%2C698&s=PPPWGT&grp=0&a=&pr.x=60&pr.y=11 | accessdate =2007-08-15 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | title =World Development Indicators database | quote =PPP GDP 2006 | publisher =World Bank | date =] | url =http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP_PPP.pdf | accessdate =2007-08-15 }}</ref>'' |
|
|
|
|
|
The first example simply ''tells'' the reader that the Brazilian economy is important. The second example ''shows'' the reader that it is. ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
=== Words and phrases to watch for === |
|
|
{{col-begin}} |
|
|
{{col-4}} |
|
|
* "acclaimed" |
|
|
* "amazing" |
|
|
* "astonishing" |
|
|
* "beautiful" |
|
|
* "best" |
|
|
* "canonical" |
|
|
* "classic" |
|
|
* "defining" and "definitive" |
|
|
* "eminent" |
|
|
* "enigma" |
|
|
* "exciting" |
|
|
* "fabulous" |
|
|
* "famous" and "infamous" |
|
|
{{col-break}} |
|
|
* "fantastic" |
|
|
* "fully" |
|
|
* "genius" |
|
|
* "global" |
|
|
* "greatest" |
|
|
* "iconic" |
|
|
* "immensely" |
|
|
* "impactful" |
|
|
* "incendiary" |
|
|
* "indisputable" |
|
|
* "influential" |
|
|
* "innovative" |
|
|
* "intriguing" |
|
|
{{col-break}} |
|
|
* "leader" |
|
|
* "legendary" |
|
|
* "major" |
|
|
* "mature" |
|
|
* "memorable" |
|
|
* "pioneer" |
|
|
* "popular" |
|
|
* "prestigious" |
|
|
* "really good" |
|
|
* "seminal" |
|
|
* "significant" |
|
|
* "solution" |
|
|
* "single-handedly" |
|
|
{{col-break}} |
|
|
* "staunch" |
|
|
* "talented" |
|
|
* "the most" |
|
|
* "top" |
|
|
* "undoubtedly" |
|
|
* "unique" |
|
|
* "visionary" |
|
|
* "virtually" |
|
|
* "well-known" |
|
|
* "well-established" |
|
|
* "world-class" |
|
|
* "worst" |
|
|
{{col-end}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== You do not have to be great to be notable == |
|
|
|
|
|
Even relatively unsuccessful subjects can still be notable, though perhaps for less glamorous reasons: the discredited scientists, the ] companies, the ] cities. Not everything is the best, the most important, or the most influential. There's something to be said for ]s, too. |
|
|
|
|
|
A general guide of what is appropriate to include in Misplaced Pages is accessible at ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Don't hide the important facts== |
|
|
The opposite fallacy is to underplay the importance of a topic. Thus it is appropriate to write: "The Pacific Ocean is Earth's largest ocean," "World War II was among the most important wars of the century." ] terms can be avoided when dealing with the third longest river in ]. But when it comes to the Amazon River, Misplaced Pages readers should be told just how big it really is. When a person or event is in fact important, the reader must be told that—tell them how important and why. |
|
|
|
|
|
In some contexts, the fame or reputation of a subject may be an objective and relevant question, better supported by a direct source than by drawing inferences indirectly based on other facts (which would constitute ]). A sourced statement that the subject is "famous", "well known", "important", "influential", or the like may be appropriate, particularly for purposes of establishing a subject's notability in an introductory sentence or paragraph. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Inappropriate subjects == |
|
|
Conversely, if you are trying to dress up something that doesn't belong in Misplaced Pages— your band, your Web site, your company's product—think twice about it. ] an advertising medium or home page service. Wikipedians are experienced in recognizing inappropriate pages, and if an article is for personal promotion or blatant advertising, it will be ] or subjected to the ] or ] processes. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Tagging articles that have peacock terms == |
|
|
If you find an article making use of peacock terms, and you don't want to fix it yourself, you can add the template {{tl|peacock}} to the beginning of the article, an article section, or an article's talk page to call other editors' attention for this article. |
|
|
|
|
|
== See also == |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|
|
] |
|