વિકિપીડિયા:નિષ્પક્ષ દૃષ્ટિકોણ: આવૃત્તિઓ વચ્ચેનો તફાવત
Content deleted Content added
નાનું →આ પણ જુઓ |
|||
લીટી ૩૦:
====યોગ્ય અને અયોગ્ય ભાર====
Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|reliable sources]], in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources.<ref>The relative prominence of each viewpoint among Wikipedia editors or the general public is not relevant and should not be considered.</ref> Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views as much of, or as detailed, a description as more widely held views. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views. For example, the article on the [[Earth]] does not directly mention modern support for the [[Flat Earth]] concept, the view of a distinct minority; to do so would give ''undue weight'' to it.
====વિવિધ પાસાઓનું સમતોલન====▼
====સમાન કાયદેસરતા આપવી====▼
In articles specifically relating to a minority viewpoint, such views may receive more attention and space. However, these pages should still make appropriate reference to the majority viewpoint wherever relevant and must not represent content strictly from the perspective of the minority view. Specifically, it should always be clear which parts of the text describe the minority view. In addition, the majority view should be explained in sufficient detail that the reader can understand how the minority view differs from it, and controversies regarding aspects of the minority view should be clearly identified and explained. How much detail is required depends on the subject. For instance, articles on historical views such as Flat Earth, with few or no modern proponents, may briefly state the modern position, and then go on to discuss the history of the idea in great detail, neutrally presenting the history of a now-discredited belief. Other minority views may require much more extensive description of the majority view to avoid misleading the reader. See [[Wikipedia:Fringe theories|fringe theories guideline]] and the [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ|NPOV FAQ]].
Wikipedia should not present a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention overall as the majority view. Views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views (such as Flat Earth). To give undue weight to the view of a significant minority, or to include that of a tiny minority, might be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. Wikipedia aims to present competing views ''in proportion to their representation in reliable sources'' on the subject. This applies not only to article text, but to images, wikilinks, external links, categories, and all other material as well.
:From [[Jimmy Wales|Jimbo Wales]], paraphrased from [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-September/006715.html a September 2003 post on the WikiEN-l mailing list]:
:*If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts;
:*If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name ''[[Wiktionary:prominent|prominent]]'' adherents;
:*If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article.
Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, ''not'' its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public.
If you can prove a theory that few or none currently believe, Wikipedia is not the place to present such a proof. Once it has been presented and discussed in [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]], it may be appropriately included. See "[[Wikipedia:No original research|No original research]]" and "[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|Verifiability]]".
▲=====વિવિધ પાસાઓનું સમતોલન=====
An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]] and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to [[Wikipedia:Recentism|recent events]] that may be in the [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a newspaper|news]]. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements.
▲=====સમાન કાયદેસરતા આપવી=====
{{Quote box|quote="જ્યારે 'યોગ્ય નિષ્પક્ષપાતીપણા'નો વિચાર કરીએ છીએ ત્યારે ... [આપણે] જ્યારે વિજ્ઞાન વિષયે મંતવ્ય અને હકિકતનાં ભેદ બાબતે અહેવાલ આપતા હોઈએ ત્યારે સાવધાન રહેવું જોઈએ. જ્યારે વૈજ્ઞાનિક બાબતો પર સર્વસંમતિ હોય ત્યારે, ‘યોગ્ય ભાર’નો વિચાર કર્યા વગર વિરુદ્ધ વિચાર દર્શાવવો એ ‘ખોટા સમતોલન’ તરફની દોરવણી જેવું બની રહેશે, અર્થાત, વાચનારને જે તે મુદ્દો ખરેખર હોય તેના કરતાં વધુ વિવાદાસ્પદ હોવાનું સમજાશે (જે ખોટું છે). આનો અર્થ એ નથી કે વૈજ્ઞાનિકોને પડકારી ન શકાય કે તેમની સામે પ્રશ્ન ન થઈ શકે, પણ એ છે કે તેના યોગદાનની ઝીણવટથી તપાસ થઈ શકે છે. વિરુદ્ધ મતનો સમાવેશ કરવો એ પણ યોગ્ય હોય શકે છે, પણ સાથે [આપણે] સ્પષ્ટતાથી એ મત ધરાવનારની વિશ્વાસપાત્રતાની માત્રા પણ જણાવવી જોઈએ."|width=35%|source=—બી.બી.સી.ની વિજ્ઞાન અહેવાલ નીતિ પરથી<ref>{{Cite web|title=BBC Trust—BBC science coverage given "vote of confidence" by independent report|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/2011/science_impartiality.html|date=20 July 2011|accessdate=14 August 2011}}</ref>|salign=right}}
While it is important to account for all significant viewpoints on any topic, Wikipedia policy does not state or imply that every minority view or extraordinary claim needs to be presented along with commonly accepted mainstream scholarship. There are many such beliefs in the world, some popular and some little-known: claims that the Earth is flat, that the Knights Templar possessed the Holy Grail, that the Apollo moon landings were a hoax, and similar ones. Conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, speculative history, or even plausible but currently unaccepted theories should not be legitimized through comparison to accepted academic scholarship. We do not take a stand on these issues as encyclopedia writers, for or against; we merely omit them where including them would unduly legitimize them, and otherwise describe them in their proper context with respect to established scholarship and the beliefs of the greater world.
====યોગ્ય સંશોધન====
====સપ્રમાણતા, સમતોલન====
| |||