| Revision as of 02:25, 27 April 2010 editPmanderson (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers62,752 edits Undo vandalism. No consensus exists.← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:15, 27 April 2010 edit undoGnevin (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users26,261 edits Undid revision 358555772 by Pmanderson (talk) undo user under review not allowed edit MoS and clearly con does excistNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{subcat guideline|style guideline|Avoid peacock terms|WP:APT|WP:SUPER|WP:PCK|WP:PEA|WP:PEACOCK}} | |||
| {{Guideline in a nutshell|Instead of ''telling'' the reader that a subject is important, use facts to ''show'' the subject's importance.}} | |||
| ] | |||
| In ] articles, forgo unsourced or unexplained '''peacock terms''' that merely promote the subject of the article ''without'' imparting verifiable information. Examples include describing people as "important", "main", or "among the greatest" in their field, without explaining why. When using these terms, make sure you have sources to support them, and that the reader understands why the person or subject is so regarded. | |||
| == Examples == | |||
| Consider the following examples. | |||
| '''Peacock term:''' | |||
| *'''William Peckenridge, 1st Duke of Omnium''' (1602 – May 8, 1671) is the most important man ever to carry that title.'' | |||
| '''Better:''' | |||
| *'''William Peckenridge, 1st Duke of Omnium''' (1602 – May 8, 1671) was personal counselor to ], royalist general in the ], a ], poet, 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. ]. Remember, "Tell me, I forget. Show me, I remember." | |||
| '''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 =2007-04-01 | 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 =2007-07-01 | 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 vigorous. The second example ''shows'' the reader that it is. ] by ], and ] facts about opinions. | |||
| '''Peacock term:''' | |||
| *'''Jonny Doe''' (1970-2009) was a legendary, award-winning rock guitarist whose versatile and virtuosic solo playing made him a highly respected musician.'' | |||
| '''Better:''' | |||
| *'''Jonny Doe''' (1970-2009) was a rock guitarist who played lead guitar in the heavy metal bands Icon and Icarus Stone in the 1990s and in the hard rock band Stoolie in the 2000s. He won a Grammy Award in 2003 for Stoolie's self-titled CD and a ''Guitar Magazine'' soloist award in 2008. The ''Penguin Encyclopedia of Rock Guitar'' called Doe a "fast-fingered guitar wizard", a comment that was echoed by his ''Guitar World'' obituary, which called him "a man with Formula 1 fingers on the fretboard". The ''Paragon History of Rock Guitar'' states that "Doe's re-interpretation of classic rock soloing, and the way he blended metal and grunge styles had a major influence on late-1990s rock guitar".'' | |||
| === Words and phrases to watch for === | |||
| Deciding whether a particular wording is suitable on any given occasion is a matter of ] and good editorial judgment. The following is a list of words that may be misused. Inclusion in this list does ''not'' mean a word should be avoided, but rather that it must be used appropriately. | |||
| {{col-begin}} | |||
| {{col-break}} | |||
| * acclaimed | |||
| * adorable | |||
| * amazing | |||
| * astonishing | |||
| * authoritative | |||
| * award‑winning | |||
| * awesome | |||
| * beautiful | |||
| * best | |||
| * brilliant | |||
| * canonical | |||
| * celebrated | |||
| * charismatic | |||
| * classic | |||
| * cute | |||
| * cutting-edge | |||
| * debilitating | |||
| * democratic | |||
| * defining and definitive | |||
| * eminent | |||
| * enigma | |||
| * epic | |||
| * esteemed | |||
| * excellent | |||
| * exciting | |||
| * extraordinary | |||
| * fabulous | |||
| * famous and infamous | |||
| * fantastic | |||
| * foremost | |||
| * formidable | |||
| * freedom fighter | |||
| * fully | |||
| * genius | |||
| * global | |||
| * greatest | |||
| {{col-break}} | |||
| * grueling | |||
| * iconic | |||
| * immensely | |||
| * impactful | |||
| * important | |||
| * impressive | |||
| * incendiary | |||
| * indisputable | |||
| * influential | |||
| * innovative | |||
| * inspirational | |||
| * inspired | |||
| * interesting | |||
| * intriguing | |||
| * leader | |||
| * leading | |||
| * legendary | |||
| * major | |||
| * masterly | |||
| * mature | |||
| * memorable | |||
| * notable | |||
| * noted | |||
| * outstanding | |||
| * passionate | |||
| * perfect | |||
| * picturesque | |||
| * pioneer | |||
| * popular | |||
| * premium | |||
| * prestigious | |||
| * primary | |||
| * prolific | |||
| * rare | |||
| * rave | |||
| {{col-break}} | |||
| * really good | |||
| * remarkable | |||
| * renowned | |||
| * respected | |||
| * select(ed) | |||
| * seminal | |||
| * significant | |||
| * skillful | |||
| * solutions | |||
| * single-handedly | |||
| * staunch | |||
| * stellar | |||
| * successful | |||
| * superior | |||
| * superlative | |||
| * talented | |||
| * the most | |||
| * thriving | |||
| * top | |||
| * transcendent | |||
| * trusted | |||
| * undemocratic | |||
| * undoubtedly | |||
| * unique | |||
| * virtually | |||
| * virtuoso | |||
| * visionary | |||
| * well-educated | |||
| * well-established | |||
| * well-known | |||
| * well-regarded | |||
| * world-class | |||
| * world-renowned | |||
| * world-famous | |||
| {{col-end}} | |||
| ==Do not hide the important facts== | |||
| This does not mean one should underplay the legitimate importance of a topic. It is appropriate to write "The Pacific Ocean is Earth's largest ocean" and "] involved the mobilization of over 100 million military personnel, making it the most widespread war in history." Peacock terms can be avoided when dealing with the third-longest river in ], but when it comes to the ], Misplaced Pages readers should be told just how long it really is. When a person or event is in fact important, the reader must be shown 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 to establish a subject's notability in an introductory sentence or paragraph. | |||
| == Inappropriate subjects == | |||
| Conversely, if you are trying to dress up something that does not belong in Misplaced Pages—your ] band, Web site, or company's product—think twice about it. ] an advertising medium or home page service. (''See also'' ].) 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. | |||
| == Don't peacock your facts == | |||
| Avoid drumming up interest in facts or trivia by tagging them with editorial remarks. For example, it is generally unhelpful to prefix a fact or development with comments like "interestingly", "ironically", "surprisingly", "it should be noted", and the like. ] and report them without the commentary; allow the ] what is interesting, ironic, surprising, or noteworthy. | |||
| == Exception for quotations == | |||
| Do not impose Misplaced Pages style guidelines on sources that are cited or quoted. It is proper to say, "Music critic Ann Bond wrote that Mozart was a great composer," or "Smith said, 'Senator Jones's acceptance of this contribution is a major scandal.'" Such indirect or direct quotations may be useful in presenting important perspectives, especially on contentious subjects, or in exemplifying a widely held view. | |||
| == See also == | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| == Notes == | |||
| {{reflist}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 09:15, 27 April 2010
Redirect to: