Wikipedia:Update/1/Content policy changes, 2011

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
4th quarter 2011




  • Wikipedia:No original research
    • In WP:PSTS, changed: "Secondary sources are second-hand accounts, at least one step removed from an event. They rely on primary sources for their material, often making analytic or evaluative claims about them." to: "Secondary sources are second-hand accounts, generally at least one step removed from an event. They rely on primary sources for their material, making analytic or evaluative claims about them."



3rd quarter 2011




  • Wikipedia:No original research
    • In WP:PSTS, added: "Further examples of primary sources include ... investigative reports, trials, (including material — which relates to either the trial or to any of the parties involved in the trial — published by any involved party, before, during or after the trial), editorials, opinion pieces ...". Added: [Do not base articles] "and material" [entirely on primary sources.] Added: "A book review too can be an opinion, summary or scholarly review."



2nd quarter 2011
  • Wikipedia:Article titles
    • In the introduction, added: "An article title is a convenient label for the article, which distinguishes it from other articles. It need not be the name of the subject; many article titles are descriptions of the subject. Wikipedia's design makes it impossible for different articles to have the same title; the URL for each article as a webpage is generated from the title. Generally, article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources; when this offers multiple possibilities, Wikipedia chooses among them by considering five principles: the ideal article title will resemble titles for similar articles, precisely identify the subject, be short, be natural, and recognizable."
    • In WP:TITLE#Deciding on an article title, changed: "Generally, article titles are based on what reliable English-language sources call the subject of the article." to: "Article titles are based on what reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject by." Changed: "an ideal title will confirm, to readers who are familiar with (though not necessarily expert in) the topic, that the article is indeed about that topic. One important aspect of this is the use of names most frequently used by English-language reliable sources to refer to the subject." to: "article titles are expected to be a recognizable name or description of the topic."
    • In WP:TITLE#Common names, added: "When using Google, generally a search of Google Books and News Archive should be defaulted to before a web search, as they concentrate reliable sources ..."
    • In WP:TITLE#Article title format, added: "The following points are used in deciding on questions not covered by the five principles; consistency on these helps avoid duplicate articles:". Removed: "To italicize a title, add the template {{italic title}} near the top of the article: Use of italics should conform to WP:ITALICS." Changed: "Titles should be nouns or noun phrases." to: "Nouns and noun phrases are normally preferred over titles using other parts of speech; such a title can be the subject of the first sentence. One major exception is titles which are quotations or titles of works: A rolling stone gathers no moss, or Try to Remember." Added: [Do not enclose titles in quotes ...] "An exception is made when the quotation marks are part of a name or title (as in the movie "Crocodile" Dundee or the album "Heroes")."
    • In WP:TITLE#Special characters, added: [The characters ...] "_" [cannot be used.] Changed: "Provide redirects to non-keyboard characters: If the use of diacritics (accent marks) is in accordance with the English-language name, or other characters not present on standard keyboards are used, provide a redirect from the equivalent title using standard English-language keyboard characters; such characters should only be used when they are customarily used for the subject in reliable English secondary sources. In particular, provide a redirect from the hyphenated form when a dash is used in an article title." to: "Redirects and characters not on a standard keyboard. Sometimes the most appropriate title will contain diacritics (accent marks), dashes, or other letters and characters not found on most English-language keyboards. This can make it difficult to navigate to the article directly. In such cases, provide redirects from versions of the title that use only standard keyboard characters."





  • Wikipedia:Verifiability
    • In the nutshell, added: "Other people have to be able to check that you didn't just make things up."
    • In the introduction, changed: "Material must be attributable to a source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, which is appropriate for the claim being made. In practice you do not need to attribute everything; only quotations and material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed, through an inline citation which directly supports the material in question." to: "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. 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."
    • Some text from WP:V#Anything challenged or likely to be challenged moved to the new subsection WP:V#Copyright and plagiarism, and changed from: "(Be mindful of copyright and plagiarism. Read the sources, understand and internalize them, then summarize them in your own words. When paraphrasing closely or quoting, use in-text attribution.)" to: "Take care to avoid plagiarism and breaches of copyright when using sources. Summarize source material in your own words as far as possible; when quoting or closely paraphrasing a source use an inline citation, and in-text attribution where appropriate."
    • In WP:V#What counts as a reliable source, added: "Source material must have been published (made available to the public in some form); unpublished materials are not considered reliable."
    • In WP:V#Questionable sources, changed: [Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or] "with no editorial oversight." to: "lacking meaningful editorial oversight."
    • In WP:V#Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves, added: "This policy also applies to pages on social networking sites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook."
    • In WP:V#Non-English sources, changed: "When citing such a source without quoting it, the original and its translation should be provided if requested by other editors" to: "When citing a non-English source for information, it is not always necessary to provide a translation. However, if a question should arise as to whether the non-English original actually supports the information, relevant portions of the original and a translation should be given in a footnote, as a courtesy."


  • Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
    • In WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, added: "As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient. For example, ultimate fate of the universe is an acceptable topic." Added: "Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors. While Wikipedia includes up-to-date knowledge about newly revealed products, short articles that consist only of product announcement information are not appropriate. Until such time that more encyclopedic knowledge about the product can be verified, product announcements should be merged to a larger topic (such as an article about the creator(s), a series of products, or a previous product) if applicable. Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content."
    • In WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, added: "While Wikipedia has many elements of a bureaucracy, it ..."
1st quarter 2011
  • Wikipedia:Article titles
    • Throughout the page, changed many instances of "common names" (and synonyms) to "most frequently used names" (and synonyms).
    • In WP:TITLE#Common names, added: "Titles are often proper nouns, such as the name of the person, place or thing that is the subject of the article." Added: [When using a search engine, restrict the results to pages written in English, and exclude the word "Wikipedia".] "(Also exclude inauthor:"Books, LLC" when searching Google Books.)" Added in a footnote: "LLC "publishes" printouts of WP articles". Added: [ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined by reliable sources, are often avoided ...] "This provision also applies when names are used as part of descriptive titles."
    • Substantial changes to WP:TITLE#Non-judgmental descriptive titles
    • Substantial changes to WP:TITLE#National varieties of English
    • In WP:TITLE#Precision and disambiguation, removed: "Articles' titles usually merely indicate the name of the topic."
    • In WP:TITLE#Treatment of alternative names, added: "If there are at least three alternate names, or there is something notable about the names themselves, a separate name section is recommended."
    • In WP:TITLE#Special characters, added: [If the use of diacritics (accent marks) is in accordance with the English-language name, or other characters not present on standard keyboards are used, provide a redirect from the equivalent title using standard English-language keyboard characters;] "such characters should only be used when they are customarily used for the subject in reliable English secondary sources. In particular, provide a redirect from the hyphenated form when a dash is used in an article title." Changed: "Do not use non-language characters" to: "Do not use symbols". Added: "This includes non-Latin punctuation such as the characters in Unicode's CJK Symbols and Punctuation block."
    • In WP:TITLE#Italics and other formatting, added: [Other types of formatting (such as bold type and superscript) can technically be achieved in the same way, but should] "generally" [not be used in Wikipedia article titles] "(except for articles on mathematics.)"


  • Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons
    • In WP:BLP#Subjects notable only for one event, added: "In addition, some subject specific notability guidelines such as WP:ATHLETE provide criteria that may support the notability of certain individuals who are known chiefly for one event."
    • In WP:BLP#Categories, lists and navigation templates, changed: "These principles apply equally to infobox statements, and to lists and navigation templates that are based on religious beliefs and sexual orientation, or which suggest that the persons included in the list or template have a poor reputation." to: "These principles apply equally to biographies of living persons, lists, navigation templates, and/or {{infobox}} statements (referring to living persons within any Wikipedia page) that are based on religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or suggest that any living person has a poor reputation."


  • Wikipedia:No original research
    • In the renamed section WP:NOR#Using sources, removed: "This policy does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia. In fact, expert input is encouraged and experts often have specific knowledge of the relevant literature. However, as with all editors, this policy does prohibit experts from drawing on their personal knowledge without citing reliable sources."
    • In WP:NOR#Primary, secondary and tertiary sources, added to a footnote: [Primary sources ... Further examples include ...] "ancient works, even if they cite earlier lost writings". Changed: "Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, or evaluative claims about material found in a primary source." to: "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so." Added in a footnote: [research articles ... review articles ...] "Be aware that either type of article can be both a primary and secondary source, although research articles tend to be more useful as primary sources and review articles as secondary sources." Added: [Reliably published tertiary sources can be helpful in providing broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources,] "especially when those sources contradict each other."
    • Removed section: WP:NOR#Citing oneself
    • In the renamed section WP:NOR#Translations and transcriptions, removed: "Where English translations of non-English material are unavailable, editors may supply their own, subject to consensus, with the original posted alongside or in a footnote. Copyright restrictions permitting, translations published by reliable sources are preferred to those provided by Wikipedians."


  • Wikipedia:Verifiability
    • In the introduction, changed: "To show that it is not original research, all material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source." to: "Material must be attributable to a source with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, which is appropriate for the claim being made." Changed: [core content policies ... editors should familiarize themselves with] "all three" to: "the key points of all three".
    • In WP:V#Burden of evidence, changed: "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed." [How quickly this should happen depends ...] to: "You may remove any material lacking a reliable source that directly supports it."
    • Removed subsection: WP:V#Personal communication


  • Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
    • In WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a directory, added: "Changelogs or release notes. An article about a product should include a history of its development and major improvements. But avoid a complete step-by-step record of every release or update. Note that this policy only applies to articles, and not Wikipedia's exhaustive article version histories."
    • In WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal, added: "Video game guides. An article about a computer game or video game should summarize the main actions the player does to win the game. But avoid lists of gameplay weapons, items, or concepts. Specific point values, achievements and trophies, time-limits, levels, character moves, character weight classes, and so on are also considered inappropriate. A concise summary is appropriate if it is essential to understanding the game or its significance in the industry. See WP:VGSCOPE."
    • In WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, added: "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating undue bias to any specific point-of-view." Changed: "Articles that present extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are original research and therefore inappropriate." to: "Articles that present original research in the form of extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are inappropriate."
    • In WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a battleground, changed: "You could also remind the user in question of Wikipedia's policy of no personal attacks in such a situation." to: "If necessary, point out gently that you think the comments might be considered uncivil, and make it clear that you want to move on and focus on the content issue."