| Revision as of 11:51, 12 May 2005 view sourceRadiant! (talk | contribs)36,918 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:15, 14 May 2005 view source Stevertigo (talk | contribs)43,174 edits comment out commentaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| '''Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary''', and an entry that consists of just a definition does not belong: But, ''an article can and should always begin with a ] ] or a clear description of the topic.'' If you're interested in working on a wiki dictionary, check out the ] project! | '''Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary''', and an entry that consists of just a definition does not belong: But, ''an article can and should always begin with a ] ] or a clear description of the topic.'' If you're interested in working on a wiki dictionary, check out the ] project! | ||
| It's natural, when you see Misplaced Pages for the first time, to mistake it for a dictionary. Many of the entries, at present, are brief. So some people start an article, listing several senses of a term, and then stop working on that article, as though they were interested only in giving the meanings of various terms. This can result in a ] article, or worse, a stub with no potential for growth and expansion. | <!-- COMMENTARY: It's natural, when you see Misplaced Pages for the first time, to mistake it for a dictionary. Many of the entries, at present, are brief. So some people start an article, listing several senses of a term, and then stop working on that article, as though they were interested only in giving the meanings of various terms. This can result in a ] article, or worse, a stub with no potential for growth and expansion. This is ''not'' a habit to be encouraged. --> | ||
| ⚫ | Nearly everyone here agrees that in general, ] articles are to be encouraged, provided they meet certain criteria. There are likewise some differences of opinion as to whether just definitions are acceptable for beginning an article. If you want to make ''everybody'' happy, add a little encyclopedic information of some sort —don't just give the meanings of the word. <!-- COMMENTARY: If you do just give the meaning of the word, nobody should be mad at you. --> Instead, they should simply take the entry to be a "stub" article, which will be expanded later. That's probably OK, in most cases, but some view this as either a violation of the WINAD policy, or otherwise meritous of ]. Deletion is a necessary process on Misplaced Pages and articles which do not meet minimum reasonable criteria can be deleted rather quickly —for some, the potential of a stub is not as important as the fact that its not yet an article. | ||
| This is ''not'' a habit to be encouraged. | |||
| ⚫ | Moreover, there are plenty of senses of terms that ''aren't'' of interest ''in an encyclopedia.'' They would be ''in a dictionary'' but Misplaced Pages isn't a dictionary. So it makes no sense to describe those other, mere dictionary senses of terms in Misplaced Pages articles (unless, somehow it is important to describe those senses in order to clarify the ''main'' topic of the article). | ||
| == Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary == | |||
| ⚫ | Nearly everyone here agrees that in general, ] articles are to be encouraged |
||
| ⚫ | Moreover, there are plenty of senses of terms that ''aren't'' of interest ''in an encyclopedia.'' They would be |
||
| Now that that's out of the way, note that while Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, our companion project ] ''is''. | Now that that's out of the way, note that while Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, our companion project ] ''is''. | ||
| == Misplaced Pages is not a usage guide == | === Misplaced Pages is not a usage guide === | ||
| Misplaced Pages is not in the business of saying how idioms, etc., are used. (But, of course, it's often very, very important in the context of an encyclopedia article to say just how a word is used. E.g., the article on ] has a long discussion about this.) | Misplaced Pages is not in the business of saying how idioms, etc., are used. (But, of course, it's often very, very important in the context of an encyclopedia article to say just how a word is used. E.g., the article on ] has a long discussion about this.) | ||
Revision as of 19:15, 14 May 2005
 | This page documents an English Misplaced Pages policy.It describes a widely accepted standard that editors should normally follow, though exceptions may apply. Changes made to it should reflect consensus. |
 | It has been suggested that this page be merged with a page that has not been specified. If you are the editor who added this template, please specify. (Discuss) |
Part of What Misplaced Pages is not.
Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, and an entry that consists of just a definition does not belong: But, an article can and should always begin with a good definition or a clear description of the topic. If you're interested in working on a wiki dictionary, check out the Wiktionary project!
Nearly everyone here agrees that in general, stub articles are to be encouraged, provided they meet certain criteria. There are likewise some differences of opinion as to whether just definitions are acceptable for beginning an article. If you want to make everybody happy, add a little encyclopedic information of some sort —don't just give the meanings of the word. Instead, they should simply take the entry to be a "stub" article, which will be expanded later. That's probably OK, in most cases, but some view this as either a violation of the WINAD policy, or otherwise meritous of deletion. Deletion is a necessary process on Misplaced Pages and articles which do not meet minimum reasonable criteria can be deleted rather quickly —for some, the potential of a stub is not as important as the fact that its not yet an article.
Moreover, there are plenty of senses of terms that aren't of interest in an encyclopedia. They would be in a dictionary but Misplaced Pages isn't a dictionary. So it makes no sense to describe those other, mere dictionary senses of terms in Misplaced Pages articles (unless, somehow it is important to describe those senses in order to clarify the main topic of the article).
Now that that's out of the way, note that while Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, our companion project Wiktionary is.
Misplaced Pages is not a usage guide
Misplaced Pages is not in the business of saying how idioms, etc., are used. (But, of course, it's often very, very important in the context of an encyclopedia article to say just how a word is used. E.g., the article on freedom has a long discussion about this.)
Articles that have been heavily cut to avoid becoming usage guides include gender-neutral pronoun and non-sexist language. Articles with information on how a word is used include singular they, homophobia, and sexism, SNAFU.
Misplaced Pages is not a slang or idiom guide
By a simple extension of the latter, Misplaced Pages is not a hacker/computer usage or other slang and idiom guide. We aren't teaching people how to talk like a hacker or a Cockney chimney-sweep; we're writing an encyclopedia. (See meta:Knocking her dead one on the nose each and every double trey for a historical example.) (But see jargon file; also, articles, even extremely in-depth articles, on hacker culture are very welcome, and insofar as guides to some particularly essential piece of hacker slang is necessary to understand those articles, of course articles on that slang would be great to have.)
Misplaced Pages is not a biographical dictionary
This is especially true in the case of biographical entries. There are special reference works known as genealogical or, more often, biographical, dictionaries. These tend to focus primarily on the immediate family connections (parents, spouses, children and their spouses) of the article subject. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, and as such focuses more on the actions and contributions of an article subject. This means that many genealogical details may be omitted in exchange for a better-flowing, more rounded article.
Biography articles should only be given for people with some sort of achievement. A good measure of achievement is whether someone has been featured in several external sources. Minor characters may of course be mentioned within other articles (e.g. Ronald Gay in gay-bashing). While on the one hand we are all certainly delighted that Misplaced Pages is growing in breadth, some (but not all) of us view breadth at the expense of the very notion of what we are working on--an encyclopedia--as a bad idea.
See also wikipedia:what Misplaced Pages is not, Misplaced Pages:Find or fix a stub, Misplaced Pages:The perfect stub article, and Misplaced Pages:Things to be moved to Wiktionary