Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Skeptics argue correcting wrongs could lead Wikipedia to favor political ideologies or movements, surfacing personal biases and partisanship. But Wikipedia follows rigorous standards, consensus processes, and transparent editing practices that prevent any one perspective from dominating. That is reflecting reality.
A common argument in discussions is that a particular action is correct, accurate, or some similar term, or that the current situation is wrong.. For example, in move discussions, it may be argued that because an official name has changed, the article title should change too; often this is the entire rationale for a move request.
Wikipedia is not a reliable source for citations elsewhere on Wikipedia, or as a source for copying or translating content. As a user-generated source , it can be edited by anyone at any time, and any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism , a work in progress , or simply incorrect.
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, it has faced several controversies. Wikipedia's open-editing model, which allows any user to edit its encyclopedic pages, has led to ...
If feasible, correct the statement right away, ensuring verifiability. Additionally, incorporate any sources utilized for verification into the article, see Wikipedia:Cite your sources. Should the statement's neutrality be contentious, see Wikipedia:NPOV dispute for more details about addressing the issue. If you cannot correct it right away:
If it is actually unclear what the correct answer is, but there is strong reason to think many or most sources are wrong or there is nothing approaching a consensus of sources, explain the conflict in prose (4b/4c) or do not discuss the topic at all (5).
While editors work on Wikipedia, mistakes are not only allowed but inevitable. Perfection is impossible. Mistakes may not be acceptable if: They are purposeful (which means they are not mistakes) They occur a reasonable period of time after one has been warned that similar actions were mistakes; If they regard biographies of living people
In some cases, vexatious litigants, or other editors who are seeking to Right Small Wrongs, may be indefinitely blocked, or even banned by the community. Some editors who are trying to Right Small Wrongs think of themselves as trying to Right Great Wrongs. If so, they may be doubly mistaken. No wrong that has been done in Wikipedia is a Great ...