This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sennalen (talk | contribs) at 18:34, 9 August 2022 (→Limitations). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:34, 9 August 2022 by Sennalen (talk | contribs) (→Limitations)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | This is an essay on the Original research policy. 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 |
Boundaries between article topics are artificial. They are just a concession to the fact that extremely large articles are hard to navigate. Conceptually, main articles and spinoffs should be thought of as part of one infinite encyclopedia. When you add information to Misplaced Pages, write like you're adding to the Infinite Article. Make necessary assumptions in order to include whatever information matters.
Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia
Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. That means the subject of an article isn't just a word, but rather an idea. As Misplaced Pages:Writing better articles says, "Assume readers are reading the article to learn. It is possible that the reader knows nothing about the subject, so the article needs to explain the subject fully."
Following the Notability policy, there isn't a separate page for every possible idea. Nonetheless, every prominent idea in reliable sources belongs somewhere in the encyclopedia. That place may be on the page named for a narrower or broader topic, following Summary Style. Part of that style is establishing the relationships between parent and child topics. In addition to wikilinks, a sub-article should contain "enough information about the broader parent subject to place the subject in context for the reader, even if this produces some duplication between the parent and child articles." Include as much detail as you need from a parent, child, or sibling article (if it makes sense) because it all comes from one body of knowledge.
Editors have the authority
The boundaries of a topic are decided by editors. Many editors believe they need to cite a reliable source to say that a claim fits in an article, but this is incorrect. Per WP:N, "Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article." Every claim needs to be verifiable, with a citation to a reliable source, but a claim does not need additional proof about which pages it can appear on. A claim is original research everywhere or nowhere.
Identifying synonymous terms, and collecting related information under a common heading is also part of writing an encyclopedia. Reliable sources do not always use consistent terminology, and it is sometimes necessary to determine when two sources are calling the same thing by different names. This does not require a third source to state this explicitly, as long as the conclusion is obvious from the context of the sources.
— WP:ORNOT#Compiling facts and information
Editorial judgement is not limited to identifying synonyms, either. It's up to editors to decide what constitutes important context. If the article on dachshunds needs to make a general claim about dogs, it can use a general source about dogs — even if that source doesn't mention dachshunds. When the topic is a controversy, not all the sources need to directly acknowledge the controversy. For example, the article Creationism debate could use a source that's strictly about evolutionary biology, if it needs to. Consider how authors from different points of view may frame an issue in different ways. Demanding that sources use particular argot can create a point-of-view fork. One person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
Sources may be written in a fictional, nationalistic, religious or other narrow context. Material from these sources incorporated into Misplaced Pages must be placed in a broader, more encyclopedic context; this is different from taking things out of context. (...) This is not original research when good editorial judgment is used.
— WP:ORNOT#Translation and contextualizing
Limitations
There are however many reasons not to include information on a page. One such reason is undue weight. Fringe theories might need accepted scholarship for context, but scholarship does not need context from fringe theories. Also, beware that providing context does not veer off into rambling.