Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
This is a list of Wikipedia articles deemed controversial because they are constantly re-edited in a circular manner, or are otherwise the focus of edit warring or article sanctions. This page is conceived as a location for articles that regularly become biased and need to be fixed, or articles that were once the subject of an NPOV dispute and ...
[1] [2] In other words, it claims that the less factual information is available on a topic, the more controversy can arise around that topic – and the more facts are available, the less controversy can arise. Thus, for example, controversies in physics would be limited to subject areas where experiments cannot be carried out yet, whereas ...
For example, climatologist Kevin E. Trenberth has published widely on the topic of climate variability and has exposed flaws in the publications of other scientists. [6] [7] [8] For past debates and controversies on scientific details see for example: History of climate change science#Discredited theories and reconciled apparent discrepancies
Disputes within contentious topics is a distinct area of research, some based on ArbCom cases and others on quantifiable variables. [21] Some topics appear to be unavoidably polarizing, such as abortion and climate change, although the level of editor conflict may not match the degree of public debate.
John Seigenthaler, an American journalist, was the subject of a defamatory Wikipedia hoax article in May 2005. The hoax raised questions about the reliability of Wikipedia and other websites with user-generated content. Since the launch of Wikipedia in 2001, the site has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, under which anyone can edit most articles, has led to concerns ...
If you contribute to a controversial article then it can be handy to separate the non-controversial contributions from the controversial ones. First make the non-controversial edits and then the (suspected) controversial ones. If the controversial edit is reverted by another contributor then at least the non-controversial edits will be maintained.
Oppose Never-ending, years-long edit wars on an article is a good indication that it is controversial. This article goes along with; supplements Wikipedia:Controversial articles and others. i.e. Reliability of Wikipedia, Criticism of Wikipedia as well as the Category:Wikipedia controversial topics
Once a controversial topic has been covered, it is important to take a step back from the edit wars and other steps that led to the end result and take a broader perspective. Does the end result overly emphasize the controversy? If an article is a biography, is the controversial incident all that the individual is known for?