ویکیپدیا:آنچه معیار مقاله خوب نیست: تفاوت میان نسخهها
محتوای حذفشده محتوای افزودهشده
جز ویرایش با ابرابزار |
|||
خط ۲۸:
* تقاضا برای بخشهای مشترک (مانند فهرست بازیگران) برای پیروی از یک شکل خاص یا شباهت با بخشهای مشابه در دیگر مقالات.
===(2) Factually accurate and verifiable===
{{Quotebox|align=center|width=90%|fontsize=100%|bgcolor=#FFFFCC|tstyle=font-size:100%|title=Actual Criteria|
<li>{{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2}}:</li>
:(a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2a}};
:(b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2b}};<ref>Either [[Parenthetical referencing|parenthetical references]] or [[WP:FOOTNOTES|footnotes]] can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.</ref> and
:(c) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2c}}. }}
Point A means that there must be at least one section with a ==Level 2== header, containing a list of sources used in the article with section titles explaining the contents.
Point B names five types of statements for which the good article criteria require some form of inline citation:
# direct quotations,
# statistics,
# published opinion,
# counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and
# contentious material relating to living persons.
This standard is higher than the [[WP:MINREF|absolute minimum standard set by policy]], but noticeably lower than many editors' personal preferences. If an article contains none of these five types of statements, then [[Wikipedia:Citing sources#General references]] may be used. If the article contains any of these five types of statements, then some sort of inline citation system must be used ''for those specific statements''. (All other article text may still be supported by general references.) Any system that allows the reader to connect a specific sentence with a specific citation is an acceptable inline citation method: editors may choose between <nowiki><ref></nowiki> tags or [[WP:PAREN|author-date parenthetical citations]] or any other system that is clear to the reader. However, ''one'' system should be used consistently for inline citations.
Page numbers (or similar details) are only needed when the inline citation concerns one of the above five types of statement ''and'' it would be difficult for the reader to find the location in the source without a page number (or similar detail).
Point C means that all facts, opinions and synthesis in a good article should be based on reliable sources with [[WP:NOR|no original research]]. Statements made in the article should either be common knowledge or reflect the material in the sources.
;Mistakes to avoid
* Imposing personal preference on reference section headings.
* Asking for inline citations beyond those required by the criteria, in particular, asking for "more" inline citations even though all statements in the required categories are already cited. (Inline citations are not decorative elements, and GA does not have any "one citation per sentence" or "one citation per paragraph" rules.)
* Not checking at least a substantial proportion of sources to make sure that they actually support the statements they're purported to support. (Sources should not be "accepted in good faith": for example, nominators may themselves have left prior material unchecked by assuming good faith.)
* Requiring page numbers where these are not essential.
* Demanding the removal of dead links, in direct violation of [[WP:Linkrot]] and [[WP:DEADREF]]
* Requiring the use (or non-use) of citation templates.
* Requiring consistently formatted, complete bibliographic citations. (If you are able to figure out what the source is, that's a good enough citation for GA.)
* Requiring that footnotes be listed in numeric order, if multiple citations are named after a sentence.
* Rejecting reliable sources because they are in a language you don't happen to read. See [[Wikipedia:Translators available]] for potential assistance.
| |||