This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PBS (talk | contribs) at 01:13, 27 April 2010 (premature to remove {{Proposed}} see talk page.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:13, 27 April 2010 by PBS (talk | contribs) (premature to remove {{Proposed}} see talk page.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | The following is a proposed Misplaced Pages policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. |
 | This guideline is a part of the English Misplaced Pages's Manual of Style. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. | Shortcuts |
 | It has been suggested that Misplaced Pages:Words to avoid, Misplaced Pages:Avoid peacock terms and Misplaced Pages:Avoid weasel words be merged into this page. (Discuss) |
 | This page in a nutshell: Choose your words carefully. |
.png)
There are no forbidden words or expressions on Misplaced Pages, but certain expressions should be used with particular care. It is almost always possible to eliminate expressions that are flattering, disparaging, vague, or clichéd, or that suggest Misplaced Pages subscribes to a particular point of view.
The advice in this guideline should not be applied rigidly. What matters is that articles be consistent with the core content policies—Neutral point of view, No original research, and Verifiability—and that they be well-written. The guideline does not apply to quotations, which should be faithfully reproduced from the original sources; see the section on quotations in the main Manual of Style.
| Manual of Style (MoS) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content | ||||||||||
| Formatting | ||||||||||
| Images | ||||||||||
| Layout | ||||||||||
| Lists | ||||||||||
By topic area
|
||||||||||
| Related guidelines | ||||||||||
Words that may introduce bias
Statement characterizations
ShortcutsEnsure that the way Misplaced Pages characterizes people's statements is neutral and accurate. Said, stated, wrote, and according to are neutral in almost all contexts. Avoid loaded terms. For example, to write that someone noted, observed or surmised can suggest the degree of the speaker's carefulness or access to evidence when that is unverifiable. To write that a person revealed, pointed out, exposed, or found something can imply that it is true, where a neutral account might preclude such an endorsement.
To write that someone claimed or insisted something can raise a question of the truth of the claim, particularly after a factual statement—for example, "After Jones came under fire for his use of racial slurs, he 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.
Puffery
ShortcutsWords 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.
Negative labels
ShortcutWords 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 controversial, 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.
Expressions of doubt
ShortcutWords 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.
Editorializing
ShortcutsThe 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 that can insult the reader, they are often excess verbiage. Misplaced Pages should not take a view as to whether an event was fortunate or not.
Unsupported attributions
These phrases present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They are referred to as "weasel words" by Misplaced Pages contributors. They can pad out sentences without adding any useful information, and may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proven should be clearly attributed.
Expressions that lack clarity
Euphemisms
ShortcutThe 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 vary for expressions concerning disabilities and disabled persons. If a person has an affliction, or is afflicted, say just that; living with is a verbose softener. The goal is clear and direct expression without causing unnecessary offense. Do not assume that plain language is inappropriate.
Clichés
ShortcutClichés are generally to be avoided in favor of more directly informative expression. Lion's share is often misunderstood; instead use a term such as all, most, or two-thirds. 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, they simply do things.
Relative time references
Template:Quote box4 Prefer specific statements of time to general ones. Don't say, "Recently, public opinion has turned against Senator Smith." Instead say, "An April 2010 Gallup poll showed that Senator Smith's approval rating had dropped 7 percent since the start of the year." When material in an article may become out of date, follow the Misplaced Pages:As of guideline.
Neologisms and new compounds
See also: Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary § Misplaced Pages does not document the usage of neologismsNeologisms 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.
Vulgarities, obscenities and profanities
Main page: Misplaced Pages:Offensive materialMisplaced Pages is not censored and its encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that may offend. Quoted words should appear as in the original source. But language that is vulgar, obscene or profane should be used only if its omission would make the article less accurate or relevant, and there is no suitable alternative. Such words should not be used outside quotations except where they are themselves the topic.
See also
References
- Cocks, Jay (June 14, 1999). "The Time 100: Bob Dylan". Time. Retrieved October 5, 2008.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - Grossman, Lyod. A Social History of Rock Music: From the Greasers to Glitter Rock (McKay: 1976), p. 66.
- The templates {{Who}}, {{Which}}, or {{By whom?}} are available if editors resist the removal of weasel words.
- The National Federation of the Blind opposes terms such as sightless in favor of the straightforward blind. Similarly, the group argues that there is no need to substitute awkward circumlocutions such as people with blindness for the plain phrase blind people; see Resolution 93-01, National Federation of the Blind, July 9, 1993, accessed April 26, 2010.