Misplaced Pages

Ensure that the way Misplaced Pages characterizes people's statements is neutral in the context. Using loaded synonyms for the verb to say can imply a one-sided point of view by Misplaced Pages. For example, to write that someone noted, observed or surmised can give credence to an internalised and unverifiable process within that person's mind. To write that a person revealed, pointed out or exposed something can imply that it is true, where a neutral account might preclude such an endorsement.

To write that someone claimed something can raise a question of the truth of the claim, particularly after a factual statement—for example, "Jones came under fire for his use of racial slurs, but in a later statement claimed he is not a racist". Similarly, be judicious in the use of admit, confess and deny, particularly of living people, because these verbs can convey guilt—for example, "Supervisors said they had heard about the incident" is better than "Supervisors confessed they had heard about the incident", which suggests that their response was blameworthy.

Stated, wrote, declared, and according to usually ascribe no point of view by Misplaced Pages.

Puffery

Words such as these are often used without attribution to promote the subject of an article, while neither imparting nor plainly summarizing verifiable information. They are known as "peacock terms" by Misplaced Pages contributors. Instead of making unprovable proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate that importance.

Peacock example:

Bob Dylan is the defining figure of the 1960s counterculture and the greatest songwriter of all time.

Just the facts:

Dylan was included in Time's 100: The Most Important People of the Century, where he was called "master poet, caustic social critic and intrepid, guiding spirit of the counterculture generation". By the mid-1970s, his songs had already been covered by hundreds of other artists.

Expressions of doubt

WP:ALLEGED

Words such as supposed and purported can imply that a given point is inaccurate. Alleged and accused are appropriate when wrongdoing is asserted but undetermined, such as with people on trial for crimes. When alleged or accused are used, ensure that the source of the accusation is clear. So-called can mean commonly named, falsely named, or contentiously named and it can be difficult to tell these apart. Simply "called" is preferable for the first meaning; detailed and attributed explanations are preferable for the others.

Negative labels

Words that negatively label a group, person, or practice—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, or a sexual practice a perversion—need in-text attribution. Terms such as sect, fundamentalist, and heretic are best avoided unless they are widely used by reliable sources to describe the group or person. In such cases, use in-text attribution.

The terms extremist and terrorist are particularly contentious and should not be used as unqualified labels in the voice of the article. Generic words such as militant, insurgent, paramilitary, and partisan may be less provocative. But even with in-text attribution, ask yourself what information is conveyed by adding such descriptions to the article. More objectively descriptive terms such as bomber, gunman, hijacker, or kidnapper are usually preferable.

Labels such as scandalous and affair can promote a contentious point of view. The suffix -gate is often used in journalism to refer to a controversial episode. Use these in articles only when they are widely used to characterize the issue, with in-text attribution if in doubt.

Editorializing

The use of adverbs such as notably and interestingly, and phrases such as it should be noted, to highlight something as particularly significant without attributing that opinion should usually be avoided. Words such as fundamentally, essentially, and basically can indicate particular interpretative viewpoints, and thus should also be attributed in controversial cases. Clearly, obviously, naturally, and of course not only suggest a point of view, they are often nothing but excess verbiage. Misplaced Pages should not take a view as to whether an event was fortunate or not.

Unsupported attributions

These phrases are frequently used to present the appearance of support for statements while denying the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They are referred to as "weasel words" by Misplaced Pages contributors. In many cases, they simply pad out sentences without conveying any useful information. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.

Euphemisms

WP:EUPHEMISM

The word died is neutral and accurate. Avoid euphemisms such as resting place: dead people aren't resting. Likewise, have sex is neutral; the euphemism make love is presumptuous. Expressions such as collateral damage and ethnic cleansing mask violence in clinical terms.

Norms of expression concerning disabilities and disabled persons vary widely and shift frequently. The goal here is to express things as clearly and directly as possible, while not causing offense when it is unnecessary. Do not assume that plain language is inappropriate. The National Federation of the Blind opposes terms such as visually impaired and sightless in favor of the straightforward blind, when that is the fact. Similarly, the group argues that there is no need to substitute awkward circumlocutions such as people with blindness for the plain phrase blind people.

Clichés

Template:Quote box4 Clichés, particularly of the figurative sort, are generally to be avoided in encyclopedic prose as distracting and unclear. For example, a lion's share raises more questions than it answers; all, most, or two-thirds, as the case may be, is more direct and informative. The tip of the iceberg should be reserved for descriptions of icebergs; the small portion evident conveys the substance without gilding the lily. People in Misplaced Pages articles do not take the plunge, but simply do things.

Neologisms and new compounds

Neologisms are expressions that have been coined recently. In most cases, they do not appear in general-interest dictionaries, though they may be used routinely within certain communities or professions. They should generally be avoided because their definitions tend to be unstable and many do not last. Where the use of a neologism is necessary to describe recent developments in a certain field, its meaning must be supported by reliable sources.

Adding common prefixes or suffixes such as pre-, post-, non–, anti-, or –like to existing words to create new compounds can aid clarity, but make sure the resulting terms are not misleading or offensive, and that they do not lend undue weight to a point of view. Adding –ism to a word, for instance, may suggest that a tenuous belief system is well established.

Profanity

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Profanity Guideline concering offensive material

This page is about the use of potentially offensive words and images in articles. For the use of such material on talk pages and project pages, see Misplaced Pages:Civility. For the policy against offensive usernames, see Misplaced Pages:Username policy § Disruptive or offensive usernames.

This page documents an English Misplaced Pages content guideline.
Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page.

Misplaced Pages guidelines

This page in a nutshell: While Misplaced Pages is not censored, Misplaced Pages articles should only contain offensive words and images for a good reason. Do not use disclaimers.

Behavioral

Discussions
Assume good faith Conflict of interest Courtesy vanishing Disruptive editing Don't bite the newcomers Don't disrupt to make a point Etiquette Gaming the system User pages Other behavioral guidelines WMF friendly space policy
Talk page guidelines Signatures

Content

Editing

Categorization
Article size Be bold Understandability Other editing guidelines
Categories, lists, templates Categorization Disambiguation

Style

Manual of Style
- contents
- lists
- tables

Deletion

Project content

Other

Misplaced Pages's encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that may offend. Misplaced Pages is not censored. However, offensive words and offensive images should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner. Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Misplaced Pages readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available.

How to treat offensive material in articles

WP:BOWDLERIZE

In original Misplaced Pages content, a vulgarity or obscenity should either appear in its full form or not at all; words should never be bowdlerized by replacing letters with dashes, asterisks, or other symbols. However, when quoting relevant material, rendering a quotation as it appears in the source cited overrides this style guideline. Where it is necessary to indicate that an alteration is carried over from a quoted source, " " or "" or a similar phrase, within single brackets, may be used.

Discussions about whether to include a vulgar or explicit image or verbal expression are often heated. As in all discussions on Misplaced Pages, it is vital that all parties practice civility and assume good faith. Labeling content with such terms as "pornography" or responses to content with such terms as "censorship" tends to inflame the discussion and should be avoided. Objective terminology is more helpful than subjective terminology.

Disclaimers should not be used in articles that contain potentially or patently offensive material. All Misplaced Pages articles are covered by the five official disclaimer pages.

"Not censored" does not give special favor to offensive content