Misplaced Pages

:Lists in Misplaced Pages: 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 23:48, 5 January 2006 editJguk (talk | contribs)15,849 edits interpretation of policy← Previous edit Latest revision as of 04:16, 30 September 2021 edit undoZatsugaku (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,011 edits →Wikilinks: Updated the obsolete Help space link to Help:Link 
(109 intermediate revisions by 42 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{guidance essay|WP:LISTV}}
{| class="messagebox"
|-
| ]
||'''This page is a ''discussion'' page about how Misplaced Pages's ] or processes should be applied in a particular scenario.''' The discussion may still be ongoing on the ]. References or links to this page should not describe it as a "policy" or "guideline". It has been proposed for adoption as a guideline, but has not reached formal voting.
⚫ |}]
⚫ {{shortcut|]}}
⚫ '''Lists in Misplaced Pages''' was developed in response to concerns that such lists are sometimes used as subterfuges to bypass the Misplaced Pages content policies of ], ], ] or ]. However, these policies apply to lists in exactly the same way as they apply to any other article.


⚫ '''Lists in Misplaced Pages''' was developed in response to concerns that such lists are sometimes used as subterfuges to bypass the Misplaced Pages content policies of ], ], ] or ].
⚫ This page has been drafted to provide some general best practices as it pertains to the creation and maintenance of lists in the article namespace. It is an interpretation of policy.


The usefulness of lists in Misplaced Pages is very clear as they often provide the starting point for readers to research a particular subject. For example, when researching ], the ] and ] are excellent resources from which to begin exploring the subject.
==Neutral point of view==


⚫ On the other hand, lists, when applied to controversial subjects or to living people, could be misused to assert a specific point of view. This essay has been drafted to provide some general best practices as it pertains to the creation and maintenance of lists in the article namespace.
] mandates that articles should adopt a neutral point of view.


===Lists are not a place to make value judgements of people or organizations=== == Lists are not a place to make value judgements of people or organizations ==
Avoid creating lists based on characterization of people or organizations, in particular when these characterizations are based on value judgements. For example, a "List of obnoxious people" is clearly not acceptable, but more subtle examples could be a "List of demagogues", or "List of exploitative companies", or a "List of authoritarian leaders", as each one of these are based on value judgements even if these can pass the test of verifiability. Avoid creating lists based on a value judgement of people or organizations. For example, a "List of obnoxious people" is clearly not acceptable, but more subtle examples could be a "List of demagogues", or "List of exploitative companies", or a "List of authoritarian leaders", as each one of these are based on value judgements even if these can pass the test of verifiability. However, it is inevitable that certain objective characterizations of things, or especially persons, will be considered either praise or condemnation by some readers. An editor need not (and cannot) generally find criteria about which no one makes a value judgement, but criteria, or inclusions/exclusions, should be done without regard to such value judgements.


Avoid using the name of the list as a way to assert a certain POV. For example, "List of ]" is probably POV, whilst "]" is less so, as long as all entries are referenced.
===Don't use the name of a list to assert a certain POV===
Avoid using the name of the list as a way to assert a certain POV. A "List of famous Brits" asserts that the people in the list are famous. A better name could be "List of noted Brits", or simpler "List of Brits", as these will be listed only if they pass the ] test. Avoid using terms that are in dispute as the main descriptor for the list. For example, "List of pseudoscientists" may not be appropriate as the term itself is disputed. A better name in this case could be "List of people described as pseudoscientists".


=== Always include list membership criteria === == List membership criteria ==
{{anchor|INC}}
Clear list membership criteria help eliminate the risk of the list taking a non-neutral point of view over who or what it includes and excludes. They are also important when considering compliance with ] (see below).
⚫ {{shortcut|WP:LISTV#INC}}
⚫ === Always include criteria ===
⚫ To avoid problems with lists, the criteria for inclusion must comply with ]. That is, if someone is listed as an X, that person must have been identified as an X by a reliable published source. Also be aware of ] when selecting the criteria for inclusion: use a criterion that is widely agreed upon rather than inventing new criteria that cannot be verified as notable or that is not widely accepted.


⚫ Lists should ''always'' include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources, especially in difficult or contentious topics. Beware of those cases in which the definitions themselves are disputed. Many lists on Misplaced Pages have been created without any membership criteria, and editors are left to guess about what or whom should be included only from the name of the list. Even if it might "seem obvious" what qualifies for membership in a list, ''explicit is better than implicit.''
⚫ === Set clear, neutral criteria ===
⚫ Ensure that the criteria for inclusion in the list are neutral and based on widely accepted definitions of terms. Both clear criteria and adherence to these criteria must take priority over any praise or condemnation an editor may feel is implied by membership. Some lists cover characterizations that can be considered negative. Such lists, if not carefully maintained can be used to promote a certain POV. Opponents of a subject may attempt to include it in the list despite that it does not meet the list criteria; and conversely supporters may attempt to remove that it despite meeting the list criteria.


=== Set clear, neutral, and unambiguous criteria ===
''Identitarian'' lists are another example where POV may often be incorporated. For example, on ], ], and ] some editors add names to these lists out of a kind of self-affirmation. To put it frankly, editors who are themselves, Jewish, born-again, or LGBT (or otherwise wish to affirm the value of those qualities), feel comforted by adding names of famous and respected people to their ]. In these types of examples, membership in the adjectival category is both contextual and often not obvious.
⚫ Ensure that the criteria for inclusion in the list are neutral and based on widely accepted definitions of terms. Both clear criteria and adherence to these criteria must take priority over any praise or condemnation an editor may feel is implied by membership. Some lists cover characterizations that can be considered negative. Such lists, if not carefully maintained can be used to promote a certain POV. Opponents of a subject may try to include it in the list despite it not meeting the list criteria. Supporters may try to remove it despite it meeting the list criteria.


Many ''identitarian'' lists, those lists related to religious affiliation, sexual identity, political affiliation, etc., seem to attract POV editing. Especially when editing a ], one should be sure to follow ], ] and ].
===Other NPOV issues===


==Lists should generally only represent consensus opinion ==
The principle of Neutral Point of View, declares that we have to describe competing views without asserting any one in particular and that minority points of view should not be presented as if they were the majority point of view. When dealing with lists, this can become a challenge. If you include leader XYZ in ] on the basis of a mention of XYZ being a dictator by one source, be sure to confirm that this is a widely held opinion, otherwise you will be in disregard of NPOV. ] applies equally to a list of like things as it does for the content article on each individual thing listed. The principle of Neutral Point of View declares that we have to describe competing views without asserting any one in particular and that minority points of view should not be presented as if they were the majority point of view. When dealing with lists, this can become a challenge. If you include leader XYZ in ] on the basis of a mention of XYZ being a dictator by one source, be sure to confirm that this is a widely held opinion, otherwise you will be in disregard of NPOV. ] applies equally to a list of like things as it does for the content article on each individual thing listed.


For purposes of list inclusion, the most reliable source is the long-standing consensus of editors on the content article of the thing listed; the failure of a content article to support list inclusion criteria should be treated as ''prima facie'' evidence against its inclusion in the list. Transient or widely disputed characterizations on a content article should be treated with suspicion by list editors. List editors should also consider whether a characterization within a content article, even if long-standing, is presented as consensus opinion or as the position of a specific named external source; in the latter case, the citation to an external source is only as good as the external source is.
==Verifiability==


⚫ == Think of the reader ==
] mandates that information on Misplaced Pages should be supported by a reputable source. Typically lists contain lots of information - namely that every entry in the list meets the list inclusion criteria. For each entry, this information needs to be referenced with a reputable source.
⚫ When creating new lists, think of the reader: Does the list add value? Is the list's criteria so open-ended as to welcome infinite results or abuse? Is there a category in Misplaced Pages already for the same subject? If so, could the list add something the category can't? Is there a reason for creating the list other than "it would be cool" or "just for the hell of it"? Lists should enhance the encyclopedic value of content rather than diminish it.


== Explore the alternatives ==
===List inclusion criteria===
Categories are self-maintaining. If you aim primarily to collect all the articles on ''foo'', consider adding them to category:''foo''; project infoboxes can automatically add articles to categories (and bots can be written which automatically collect from categories and present lists sorted by other criteria; Mathbot is one such). Lists that consist solely of external, off-Misplaced Pages links and ''nothing else'' are liable to speedy deletion under ]. If you have a short list of people related to a given subject, it may be simpler just to include it in the main article.


==Wikilinks==
A reputable source should always be provided to support the assertion that a list entry meets the list inclusion criteria. Sometimes this will be on the list page too, sometimes, if there is a Misplaced Pages article for the item on the list, this will be provided in that article. Care needs to be taken as to the reputation of any potential source, particularly in controversial areas. Namely, is a given source reputable as being unbiased and factual with respect to the matter in question.
Don't ] every item on the list, without making sure every link goes to an appropriate article – not a ] page, and especially not a different topic with the same name. A reader clicking such a misdirected link might take a long time to realize it's a dead end with no information on the topic he wants. Also, it interferes with ].

For example, an editor may want to add ] to ] based on one source that claims that Bush ursuped power in the US by illegal means. The existence of such source may be verifiable, but this in not necessarily a reputable source - it may not be a general held view. (Note also that NPOV does not allow us to present a minority point of view as if it is a consensus point of view.) As a practical matter, it is clear that there is no general worldwide consensus that Bush is a dictator, although some sources claim he is, and he should not be on that list.

⚫ To avoid problems with lists, the criteria for inclusion needs to be such that it can be verified whether entries meet that. Otherwise it will be impossible to comply with ]. Be also aware of ] when selecting the criteria for inclusion: use a criterion that is widely agreed upon rather than inventing new criteria that cannot be verified as notable or that is not widely accepted.

⚫ Lists should ''always'' include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources, especially in difficult or contentious topics. Beware of those cases in which the definitions themselves are disputed. Many lists on Misplaced Pages have beeen created without any membership criteria, and editors are left to guess about what or whom should be included only from the name of the list. Even if it might "seem obvious" what qualifies for membership in a list, ''explicit is better than implicit.''

==Other matters==

⚫ === Think of the reader ===
⚫ When creating new lists, think of the reader: Does the list add value? Is the list's criteria so open-ended as to welcome infinite results or abuse? Is there a category in Misplaced Pages already for the same subject? Lists should enhance the encyclopedic value of content rather than diminish it.


==See also== ==See also==
*] *]
*] *]
*] *]
*] *]
Line 60: Line 49:
*] *]
*] *]
*]
*] *]
* *
*]. *].

{{List navbox}}

⚫ ]
]

Latest revision as of 04:16, 30 September 2021

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

Lists in Misplaced Pages was developed in response to concerns that such lists are sometimes used as subterfuges to bypass the Misplaced Pages content policies of No original research, Neutral point of view, Verifiability or What Misplaced Pages is not.

The usefulness of lists in Misplaced Pages is very clear as they often provide the starting point for readers to research a particular subject. For example, when researching Typesetting, the List of type designers and List of typefaces are excellent resources from which to begin exploring the subject.

On the other hand, lists, when applied to controversial subjects or to living people, could be misused to assert a specific point of view. This essay has been drafted to provide some general best practices as it pertains to the creation and maintenance of lists in the article namespace.

Lists are not a place to make value judgements of people or organizations

Avoid creating lists based on a value judgement of people or organizations. For example, a "List of obnoxious people" is clearly not acceptable, but more subtle examples could be a "List of demagogues", or "List of exploitative companies", or a "List of authoritarian leaders", as each one of these are based on value judgements even if these can pass the test of verifiability. However, it is inevitable that certain objective characterizations of things, or especially persons, will be considered either praise or condemnation by some readers. An editor need not (and cannot) generally find criteria about which no one makes a value judgement, but criteria, or inclusions/exclusions, should be done without regard to such value judgements.

Avoid using the name of the list as a way to assert a certain POV. For example, "List of bad actors" is probably POV, whilst "List of Bad Acting Award Winners" is less so, as long as all entries are referenced.

List membership criteria

Shortcut

Always include criteria

To avoid problems with lists, the criteria for inclusion must comply with Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. That is, if someone is listed as an X, that person must have been identified as an X by a reliable published source. Also be aware of original research when selecting the criteria for inclusion: use a criterion that is widely agreed upon rather than inventing new criteria that cannot be verified as notable or that is not widely accepted.

Lists should always include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources, especially in difficult or contentious topics. Beware of those cases in which the definitions themselves are disputed. Many lists on Misplaced Pages have been created without any membership criteria, and editors are left to guess about what or whom should be included only from the name of the list. Even if it might "seem obvious" what qualifies for membership in a list, explicit is better than implicit.

Set clear, neutral, and unambiguous criteria

Ensure that the criteria for inclusion in the list are neutral and based on widely accepted definitions of terms. Both clear criteria and adherence to these criteria must take priority over any praise or condemnation an editor may feel is implied by membership. Some lists cover characterizations that can be considered negative. Such lists, if not carefully maintained can be used to promote a certain POV. Opponents of a subject may try to include it in the list despite it not meeting the list criteria. Supporters may try to remove it despite it meeting the list criteria.

Many identitarian lists, those lists related to religious affiliation, sexual identity, political affiliation, etc., seem to attract POV editing. Especially when editing a List of people like me, one should be sure to follow WP:NPOV, WP:OR and WP:V.

Lists should generally only represent consensus opinion

The principle of Neutral Point of View declares that we have to describe competing views without asserting any one in particular and that minority points of view should not be presented as if they were the majority point of view. When dealing with lists, this can become a challenge. If you include leader XYZ in List of dictators on the basis of a mention of XYZ being a dictator by one source, be sure to confirm that this is a widely held opinion, otherwise you will be in disregard of NPOV. Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources applies equally to a list of like things as it does for the content article on each individual thing listed.

For purposes of list inclusion, the most reliable source is the long-standing consensus of editors on the content article of the thing listed; the failure of a content article to support list inclusion criteria should be treated as prima facie evidence against its inclusion in the list. Transient or widely disputed characterizations on a content article should be treated with suspicion by list editors. List editors should also consider whether a characterization within a content article, even if long-standing, is presented as consensus opinion or as the position of a specific named external source; in the latter case, the citation to an external source is only as good as the external source is.

Think of the reader

When creating new lists, think of the reader: Does the list add value? Is the list's criteria so open-ended as to welcome infinite results or abuse? Is there a category in Misplaced Pages already for the same subject? If so, could the list add something the category can't? Is there a reason for creating the list other than "it would be cool" or "just for the hell of it"? Lists should enhance the encyclopedic value of content rather than diminish it.

Explore the alternatives

Categories are self-maintaining. If you aim primarily to collect all the articles on foo, consider adding them to category:foo; project infoboxes can automatically add articles to categories (and bots can be written which automatically collect from categories and present lists sorted by other criteria; Mathbot is one such). Lists that consist solely of external, off-Misplaced Pages links and nothing else are liable to speedy deletion under criterion A3. If you have a short list of people related to a given subject, it may be simpler just to include it in the main article.

Wikilinks

Don't wikilink every item on the list, without making sure every link goes to an appropriate article – not a disambiguation page, and especially not a different topic with the same name. A reader clicking such a misdirected link might take a long time to realize it's a dead end with no information on the topic he wants. Also, it interferes with WikiProject Disambiguation.

See also

Lists in Misplaced Pages
Style
Content
Rationale
Existing lists
Templates
Assistance
Categories: