Wikipedia:Verifiability/2012 RfC
| Verifiability mediation (general talk) Work groups: one (talk) • two (talk) • three (talk) • four (talk) RfC draft |
 | This page is a draft of an RfC about Wikipedia:Verifiability. It is not yet ready to be commented on by the wider Wikipedia community. If you have questions or comments about the draft, please leave them on the mediation talk page, and if you have any general questions or comments about the verifiability policy, please leave them on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. Thank you. |
This is a community-wide Request for Comment about Wikipedia:Verifiability, its lede, and the much-discussed phrase "verifiability, not truth" (VnT). Instead of presenting just one proposal for comment, we are asking you to consider a range of possibilities.
A previous RfC in October–December 2011 did not reach consensus as to whether the opening paragraph of WP:V should or should not be revised in order to address concerns amongst many members of the community about possible misinterpretation of VnT. Since then, there has been a great deal of discussion at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability and Wikipedia talk:Verifiability/First sentence. These discussions led to a mediated discussion. The mediation began in late February, was announced on the WP:V talk page, and was conducted by Mr Stradivarius. The present RfC grew out of that mediation.
This RfC has two sections:
- Part 1. Five specific versions of the lede for you to comment on, including the way it looks right now, a way it looked in the recent past, upon the conclusion of the previous RfC, and three different ways it could look in the future.
- Part 2. Eight general questions about whether you support or oppose various views about how WP:Verifiability and its lede should look.
This RfC is a discussion, not a vote. You are strongly encouraged to provide informative and detailed comments that will help achieve consensus.
The RfC has been advertised at WT:V, WT:NPOV, WT:NOR, WP:Village pump (proposals), WP:Centralized discussion, WP:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines, WP:Requests for comment/Wikipedia proposals, and through a Watchlist notice.
The RfC will run for 30 days, opening at (date, time), and closing at (date, time). It will not be closed early, nor extended longer. Upon closing, all user comments will be read carefully, and consensus will be determined by a panel of three uninvolved administrators: (name), (name), and (name).
Proposals for the lede text, and comments
Please provide informative comments. If you support or oppose an option, please say what you like or dislike about it, as specifically as possible. Support with revisions means that you oppose a draft in its present form, but would support it with revisions; please indicate what those revisions would be. You may discuss comments using the "#:" notation.
Option A is the same as Wikipedia:Verifiability as of 00:50, 13 May 2012.[1]Needs to be updated before opening RfC! Option B is from 00:47, 15 December 2011, when the previous RfC was closed.[2] The other options were drafted by the participants in the mediation.
Verifiability on Wikipedia is a reader's ability to check cited sources that directly support the information in an article. All information in Wikipedia must be verifiable, but because other policies and guidelines also influence content, verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Verifiability, and not truth, is one of the fundamental requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia; truth, of itself, is not a substitute for meeting the verifiability requirement. No matter how convinced you are that something is true, do not add it to an article unless it is verifiable.
It must be possible to attribute all information in Wikipedia to reliable, published sources that are appropriate for the content in question. However, in practice it is only necessary to provide inline citations for quotations and for any information that has been challenged or that is likely to be challenged.[1] Appropriate citations guarantee that the information is not original research, and allow readers and editors to check the source material for themselves. Any material that requires a citation but does not have one may be removed. Unsourced contentious material about living people must be removed immediately. For help on adding citations, see Citing sources. This policy applies to all material in the mainspace.
Verifiability, No original research and Neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.
== Notes ==
- ^ See the section Using sources of the policy No original research, that describes summarizing materials in your own words, leaving nothing implied that goes beyond the sources.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true.
To show that it is not original research, all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable, published source appropriate for the content in question, but in practice you do not need to attribute everything. This policy requires that all quotations and anything challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed in the form of an inline citation that directly supports the material.[1] For how to write citations, see Citing sources.
This policy applies to all material in the mainspace—articles, lists, sections of articles, and captions—without exception, and in particular to material about living persons. Anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed, and unsourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately.
Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies, along with No original research and Neutral point of view. These policies jointly determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in articles. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should familiarize themselves with the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.
== Notes ==
Verifiability on Wikipedia means that readers can check reliable sources that directly support the information in an article. All information in Wikipedia must be verifiable, but because other policies, guidelines, and considerations also influence content, and particularly influence when verifiable but inaccurate material should not be included, verifiability by itself does not guarantee inclusion. Verifiability, not truth, is one of the key requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia—nothing, such as your personal experience or what you know to be true, can be a substitute for meeting the verifiability requirement.[1] No matter how convinced you are that something is true, do not add it to an article unless it is also verifiable.
It must be possible to attribute all information in Wikipedia to reliable, published sources that are appropriate for the content in question.[2] However, in practice it is only necessary to provide inline citations for quotations and for any information that has been challenged or that is likely to be challenged.[3] Appropriate citations guarantee that the information is not original research, and allow readers and editors to check the source material for themselves. Any material that requires a citation but does not have one may be removed.[4] Unsourced contentious material about living people must be removed immediately. For help on adding citations, see Citing sources. This policy applies to all material in the mainspace.
Verifiability, No original research and Neutral point of view[5] are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.
== Notes ==
- ^ In this long-standing description, "not truth" means that nothing (such as truth) can take the place of the verifiability requirement. See also the essay Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth.
- ^ Note that this policy requirement is for verifiability, not actual verification. In so doing, we are verifying that the statements in Wikipedia exist in the cited sources, as opposed to verifying the facts on which those statements are based or verifying that the sources are correct that those statements are true. Thus, "some traditions claim that the Moon is made of green cheese" is more amenable to verification than is "the Moon is made of green cheese".
- ^ See the section Using sources of the policy No original research, that describes summarizing materials in your own words, leaving nothing implied that goes beyond the sources.
- ^ If you feel that verifiable information is inaccurate, it may be best not to remove it until the issue has been fully discussed on the talk page and a consensus for removal has been established. Keep in mind that rewriting how the material is presented is often a better choice than removing it entirely.
- ^ In particular, the discussion of due and undue weight has a strong bearing on when verifiable material should or should not be included.
In Wikipedia, verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that information comes from a reliable source.
Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it.[1] When reliable sources disagree, their conflict should be presented from a neutral point of view, giving each side its due weight.
All the material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that requires a source but does not have one may be removed, and unsourced contentious material about living people must be removed immediately. For how to write citations, see Citing sources.
Verifiability, No original research and Neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three. Articles must also comply with the copyright policy.
== Notes ==
- ^ This principle has been historically and notably expressed on this policy page as "the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth". See the essay, WP:Verifiability, not truth
Verifiability is one of the most essential requirements in Wikipedia. Information added to articles must be verifiable using only reliable sources that have been published.
An appropriate inline citation is evidence that information is verifiable. Inline citations are required for any information that has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, and for all quotations. Suitable inline citations should refer to published reliable sources that explicitly support the information being presented.[1] For help on adding citations, see Citing sources.
Any material that requires an inline citation but does not have a suitable one may be removed.[2] Unsourced contentious material about living people must be removed immediately.
Compliance with the Verifiability policy does not guarantee that material will be accepted. For example, it must also comply with other policies and guidelines, most notably No Original Research, Neutral Point of View, and Copyright.
== Notes ==
- ^ Also, see the section Using sources of the policy No original research, which says that material from sources should be summarized or rephrased in your own words.
- ^ An alternative to removal is adding a {{citation needed}} inline tag. If it is impractical to add these because there would be too many of them, consider using at the top of a section {{ref improve section}} or at the top of the article {{refimprove}}.
Comments
Option A — Current version, with "verifiability, and not truth"
Support Option A
Support Option A with revisions
Oppose Option A
Option B — Recent past version, with "verifiability, not truth"
Support Option B
Support Option B with revisions
Oppose Option B
Option C — "Verifiability, not truth" with added clarification
Support Option C
Support Option C with revisions
Oppose Option C
Option D — New wording about perceived truth, verifiability
Support Option D
Support Option D with revisions
Oppose Option D
Option E — About verifiability, no mention of "truth"
Support Option E
Support Option E with revisions
Oppose Option E
General views about WP:V and its lede
Please indicate whether you endorse, oppose, or are neutral about each of the following views. Please provide informative comments. You may also discuss comments, using the "#:" notation.