From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from
Wikipedia:POINT)
![]() |
This page in a nutshell: In Wikipedia, disruptively applying reasoning with which you disagree is not an acceptable way of discrediting it. |
[edit] State your point—do not prove it experimentally
When one becomes frustrated with the way a policy or guideline is being applied, the temptation may arise to try to discredit the rule or interpretation thereof by, in one's view, enforcing it consistently. This may even entail an attempt to turn consensus against a policy by satirically applying it on various pages.
Such tactics are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. Consider that Wikipedia is not perfectly consistent, and its rules are not a code of law. Discussion is the preferred venue for highlighting issues with rules or practices. If direct discussion fails to resolve a problem, look into dispute resolution.
[edit] Examples
- If you have nominated an article for deletion, and others vote to keep it...
- do make your case clearly in the discussion, noting examples of articles that could exist under the rationale for keeping the one in question.
- do not create an article on what you consider to be a similarly unsuitable topic just to get it listed for deletion and have others make the same arguments you are making.
- If someone deletes from an article "unimportant" information which you consider to in fact be important to the subject...
- do argue on the article's talk page for the material's inclusion
- do not delete most of the remaining article as "unimportant".
- If you have added a reference which someone then removes because the source is self-published...
- do explain why the use of the source in question was appropriate in that instance, or find a reliable third-party published source for the information
- do not remove from the article, or from any other article, all the sources that vaguely look like blogs or wikis
- If you think someone unjustifiably removed "unsourced" content...
- do find a source for it, make the referencing clear if it was already present, or explain why the content in question shouldn't require a cited source
- do not remove all apparently unsourced content on the page
- If you feel that a policy or guideline should be changed, and others disagree...
- do explain what you see as the problem with the rule as written, and perhaps post a notice of the discussion at the Village pump
- do not attempt to enforce the existing rule with the aim of provoking opposition to it
- If you feel that it is too easy to add misinformation to Wikipedia...
- do watch recent changes and fact-check anything that looks at all suspicious
- do not create an elaborate hoax with hopes of getting publicity for it
- If you think that this list of examples has become excessively long and boring...
- do opine that the guideline's purpose would remain clear even if half of the examples were deleted
- do not add 47 more examples just to show that people won't actually read such lists
[edit] Important note
A commonly used shortcut to this page is WP:POINT. However, just because someone is making a point does not mean that they are disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate it, which is the only circumstance under which someone should be warned about this guideline.
[edit] See also
|
Key Wikipedia policies and guidelines |
|
| Overview |
|
|
| Project-wide principles |
|
|
| Article standards policies |
|
|
| Behavioral policies |
|
|
| Behavioral guidelines |
|
|
| Classification guidelines |
|
|
| Content guidelines |
|
|
| Editing guidelines |
|
|
| Style conventions |
|
|