Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
usually indicates that the annotator believes the move to be dubious [2] or questionable but to possibly have merits or be difficult to refute. The "?!" The "?!" may also indicate that the annotator believes the move is weak or deserves criticism but not bad enough to warrant a "?".
Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. [ 9 ]
Use this template to tag a specific statement or alleged fact that is sourced but which nevertheless seems dubious or unlikely to be correct. Template parameters [Edit template data] This template prefers inline formatting of parameters. Parameter Description Type Status Section name on talk page 1 Section name on talk page where further information or discussion can be found String optional ...
False authority (single authority) – using an expert of dubious credentials or using only one opinion to promote a product or idea. Related to the appeal to authority . False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are given as the only possible options when, in reality, there ...
Creation-evolution controversy The creation-evolution controversy (also termed the creation vs. evolution debate or the origins debate) is a recurring dispute about the origins of the Earth, humanity, life, and the universe, a debate most prevalent in certain regions of the United States, where the mass media often portrays it as part of the ...
If a Wikipedia article links to this page, it is due to an editor's concerns regarding the accuracy of statements within that article. Statements causing such concern are marked with the tags [disputed – discuss] or [dubious – discuss]. An editor can insert such a warning by using the templates {{Disputed inline}} or {}.
A Constitutionally Dubious California Bill Would Ban Possession of AI-Generated Child Pornography
According to John C. Norcross et al. less is consensus about ineffective "compared to effective procedures" but identifying both "pseudoscientific, unvalidated, or 'quack' psychotherapies" and "assessment measures of questionable validity on psycho-metric grounds" was pursued by various authors.