| Revision as of 14:25, 27 April 2006 view sourceRobert A West (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,469 edits →Burden of evidence: Per discussion -- Do articles require third party sources?← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:18, 27 April 2006 view source 69.51.71.8 (talk) →Verifiability, not truthNext edit → | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| == Verifiability, not truth == | == Verifiability, not truth == | ||
| Officially Gay Homo of the Gay Guy | |||
| One of the keys to writing good encyclopedia articles is to understand that they should refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments '''that have already been published by reputable publishers'''. The goal of Misplaced Pages is to become a complete and reliable encyclopedia, so editors should ] ] so that their edits may be verified by readers and other editors. | |||
| "Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a '']'' article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because ] may not be published in Misplaced Pages. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. As counter-intuitive as it may seem, the threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is '''verifiability, not truth'''. | |||
| A good way to look at the distinction between verifiability and truth is with the following example. Suppose you are writing a Misplaced Pages entry on a famous physicist's Theory X, which has been published in peer-reviewed journals and is therefore an appropriate subject for a Misplaced Pages article. However, in the course of writing the article, you contact the physicist and he tells you: "Actually, I now believe Theory X to be completely false." Even though you have this from the author himself, you cannot include the fact that he said it in your Misplaced Pages entry. | |||
| Why not? Because it is not verifiable in a way that would satisfy the Misplaced Pages readership or other editors. The readers don't know who you are. You can't include your telephone number so that every reader in the world can call you for confirmation. And even if they could, why should they believe you? | |||
| For the information to be acceptable to Misplaced Pages you would have to persuade a reputable news organization to publish your story first, which would then go through a process similar to peer review. It would be checked by a reporter, an editor, perhaps by a fact-checker, and if the story were problematic, it might be checked further by the lawyers and the editor-in-chief. These checks and balances exist to ensure that accurate and fair stories appear in the newspaper. | |||
| '''It is this fact-checking process that Misplaced Pages is not in a position to provide''', which is why the ] and ] policies are so important. | |||
| If the newspaper published the story, you could then include the information in your Misplaced Pages entry, citing the newspaper article as your source. | |||
| == Sources == | == Sources == | ||
Revision as of 20:18, 27 April 2006
- WP:V redirects here. For vandalism, see Misplaced Pages:Vandalism (WP:VAND).
 | 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. | Shortcut
|
 | This page in a nutshell: Information on Misplaced Pages must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed. |
| Policies and guidelines (list) |
|---|
| Principles |
| Content policies |
| Conduct policies |
| Other policy categories |
| Directories |
The threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth. This means that we only publish material that is verifiable with reference to reliable, published sources.
Misplaced Pages:Verifiability is one of Misplaced Pages's three content-guiding policy pages. The other two are Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the main namespace. They should therefore not be interpreted in isolation from one other, and editors should try to familiarize themselves with all three. The three policies are non-negotiable and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus.
The policy
|
Verifiability, not truth
Officially Gay Homo of the Gay Guy
Sources
Further information: Misplaced Pages:Reliable sourcesArticles should rely on credible, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. For academic subjects, the sources should preferably be peer-reviewed. Sources should also be appropriate to the claims made: outlandish claims beg strong sources.
English-language sources should be given whenever possible, and should always be used in preference to foreign-language sources, so that readers can easily verify that the source material has been used correctly.
Burden of evidence
- For more information on how to include citations, see Misplaced Pages:Citing sources
The burden of evidence lies with the editors who have made an edit or wish an edit to remain. Editors should therefore provide references. If an article topic has no reputable, reliable, third-party sources, Misplaced Pages should not have an article on that topic.
Any edit lacking a source may be removed, but some editors may object if you remove material without giving people a chance to provide references. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, a good idea is to move it to the talk page. Alternatively, you may tag the sentence by adding the {{ fact}} template, or tag the article by adding {{ not verified}} or {{ unsourced}}.
If the article or information is about a living person, remove the unsourced information immediately. See Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons. When removing information be careful to observe Misplaced Pages:Civility.
Sources of dubious reliability
In general, sources of dubious reliability are sources with a poor reputation for fact-checking, or with no fact-checking facilities or editorial oversight.
Sometimes a statement can only be found in a publication of dubious reliability, such as a tabloid newspaper. If the statement is relatively unimportant, remove it. If it is important enough to keep, attribute it to the source in question. For example: "According to the British tabloid newspaper The Sun..."
Self-published sources
Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources. Exceptions may be when a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist, has produced self-published material. In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information on the professional researcher's blog is really worth reporting, someone else will have done so.
Self-published sources in articles about themselves
Self-published sources, and published sources of dubious reliability, may be used only as sources of information on themselves, and only in articles about them. For example, the Stormfront website may be used as a source of information on itself in an article about Stormfront, so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by reliable, third-party published sources. Self-published sources may never be used as sources of information on another person or topic.
A Misplaced Pages article about an unreliable newspaper should not — on the grounds of needing to give examples of their published stories — repeat any claims the newspaper has made about third parties, unless the stories have been repeated by credible third-party sources.
Other comments
Just because some information is verifiable, it doesn't mean that Misplaced Pages is the right place to publish it. See what Misplaced Pages is not. And just because information is true, that doesn't mean that it meets our verifiability requirements — information has to be sourced if it is to have a place in Misplaced Pages (although, of course, if information is true, you should be able to find a ready reputable source for it). Another effect of this policy is that as original research will not be supported by reputable sources, it cannot be included. See Misplaced Pages:No original research.
A thought: Tacitus' recommendation
nos consensum auctorum secuturi, quae diversa prodiderint sub nominibus ipsorum trademus. Proposing as I do to follow the consentient testimony of historians, I shall give the differences in their narratives under the writers' names. Tacitus, Annals XIII, 20 – Church/Brodribb translation
See also
- WikiProject Fact and Reference Check
- Forum for Encyclopedic Standards
- Stable versions
- Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons
- Misplaced Pages:Criticism