Rakasteluvideo miten saada nainen laukeamaanViews that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views (such as Flat Earth). Controversial subjects Wikipedia deals with numerous areas that are frequently subjects of intense debate both in the real world and among editors of the encyclopedia. Describing aesthetic opinions Wikipedia articles about art and other creative topics (e.g., musicians, actors, books, etc.) have a tendency to become effusive. Fringe theories and pseudoscience Further information: Wikipedia:Fringe theories and Due and undue weight Pseudoscientific theories are presented by proponents as science, but characteristically fail to adhere to scientific standards and methods. Before asking, please review the links below. Instead, alternative names should be given due prominence within the article itself, and redirects created as appropriate. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news. Wikipedia should not present a dispute as if a view held by a small minority is as significant as the majority view. Since the npov policy is often unfamiliar to newcomersand is so central to Wikipedia's approachmany issues surrounding it have been covered before very extensively. Retrieved See also Policies and guidelines Noticeboards Information pages Essays Articles Templates General npov templates: POV message used to attract other editors to assess and fix neutrality problems POV-check message used to request that an article be checked for neutrality.
Notes Article sections devoted solely to criticism, and pro-and-con sections within articles, are two commonly cited examples. Even where a topic is presented in eroottisia kertomuksia seksikauppa joensuu terms of facts rather than opinions, inappropriate tone can be introduced through the way in which facts are selected, presented, or organized. Remove material only where you have a good reason to believe it misinforms or misleads readers in ways that cannot be addressed by rewriting the passage. Using this or other expressions of doubt may make an article appear to promote one position over another. When there is a consensus of opinion on scientific matters, providing an opposite view without consideration of 'due weight' can lead to 'false balance meaning that viewers might perceive an issue to be more controversial than it actually. However, it is appropriate to note how an artist or a work has been received by prominent experts and the general public. Descriptive titles should be worded neutrally, so as not to suggest a viewpoint for or against a topic, or to confine the content of the article to views on a particular side of an issue (for example, an article titled. Handling neutrality disputes Attributing and specifying biased statements Further information: Wikipedia:Manual of Style Point of view Biased statements of opinion can be presented only with in-text attribution. Ensure that the reporting of different views on a subject adequately reflects the relative levels of support for those views, and that it does not give a false impression of parity, or give undue weight to a particular view. Aesthetic opinions are diverse and subjectivewe might not all agree about who the world's greatest soprano. In addition, the majority view should be explained in sufficient detail that the reader can understand how the minority view differs from it, and controversies regarding aspects eroottisia kertomuksia seksikauppa joensuu of the minority view should be clearly identified and explained. This policy is non-negotiable, and the principles eroottisia kertomuksia seksikauppa joensuu upon which it is based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, nor by editor consensus. Avoiding constant disputes How can we avoid constant and endless warfare over neutrality issues? Editors are strongly encouraged to familiarize themselves with all three. A neutral characterization of disputes requires presenting viewpoints with a consistently impartial tone; otherwise articles end up as partisan commentaries even while presenting all relevant points of view. This involves describing the opposing views clearly, drawing on secondary or tertiary sources that describe the disagreement from a disinterested viewpoint. See also: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ, achieving what the Wikipedia community understands as neutrality means carefully and critically analyzing a variety of reliable sources and then attempting to convey to the reader the information contained in them fairly, proportionately.
Soapy massage with happy ending.
Seksiseuraa kotka pornstar escort experience
For example, Evolution as fact and theory is a sub-article of Evolution, and Creation-evolution controversy is a sub-article of Creationism. Are you saying that, to be neutral in writing an article, I must lie, in order to represent the view I disagree with? Usually, articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects. Wikipedia articles on history and religion draw from a religion's sacred texts as well as from modern archaeological, historical, and scientific sources. Sanger in 2001 suggested that avoiding bias as one of Wikipedia's "rules to consider". Article structure Further information: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout The internal structure of an article may require additional attention, to protect neutrality, and to avoid problems like POV forking and undue weight. Commonly cited examples include articles that read too much like a debate, and content structured like a resume. Neutral articles are written with a tone that provides an unbiased, accurate, and proportionate representation of all positions included in the article. All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view nPOV which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. For example, the word claim, as in "Jim claimed he paid for the sandwich could imply a lack of credibility. We do not take a stand on these issues as encyclopedia writers, for or against; we merely omit this information where including it would unduly legitimize it, and otherwise include and describe these ideas in their proper context with respect. Some article titles are descriptive, rather than being a name.