Wikipedia:Guide to addressing bias: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:29, 17 January 2023

Latest revision as of 10:55, 1 August 2024

(40 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{pp-sock|small=yes}}

{{essay|WP:ADDBIAS|WP:FIXBIAS}}

{{Nutshell|A guide for editors and readers who want to fix the bias of an article on Wikipedia.}}

Line 18 ⟶ 19:

===Why we use encyclopedic neutrality===

If we were to write our articles using journalistic neutrality, we would have to reduce the presented evidence that the earth is actually an [[Figure of the Earth|oblate spheroid]] until it matched the evidence purporting to show that the earth is flat. We would have to remove criticisms of the evidence purporting to show that the earth is flat, such that both sides are given equal weight. We would have to diminish or even fail to report on the credentials of those scientists who have spoken out against the flat earth hypothesis, such that their depiction was similar to the non-scientists lacking meaningful credentials who advocate for the idea. In short, we would have to re-write our article to deceptively imply that it was an open and serious question as to whether or not the earth is flat, when the truth is that it is not. This is -quite obviously- counter to the very purpose of an encyclopedia. Implying [[WP:GEVAL|false equivalences]] between educated theories and ignorant navalnavel-gazing is very close to the opposite of what an encyclopedia should do, and suppressing accurate information about a subject ''is'' the exact opposite of what an encyclopedia should do.

===What this means to a person attempting to address the bias of an article===

Line 31 ⟶ 32:

#If you did not have a source in mind already, use the criteria at [[WP:IRS|Identifying reliable sources]] to find sources which the community would consider reliable, and which agree with your own point-of-view about the subject.

#Gather '''at least''' two or three of those, focusing especially on sources which explicitly disagree with claims made in the article.

#Go to the article's [[WP:TP|talk page]], and -— using those sources- point out some '''specific''' changes you think should be made. Explain that you feel the article has a POV problem, but ''focus on how to fix it'', not complaining about the problem itself. Explaining that you believe the article is biased because of a certain claim in a certain reliable source is perfectly acceptable. However, claiming that the article is biased because Wikipedia is biased, or because you think only biased editors have worked on it will accomplish nothing more than convincing the other editors there that you aren't worth listening to.

#Revisit the talk page frequently. Engage [[WP:CIVIL|civilly]] with editors who respond, and try to remain calm, even if you feel the others are being dismissive or rude. If you can remain calm in the face of [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]] and rudeness, you are far more likely to get your way. If things get out of hand, and you have remained calm while others insult and belittle you, then visit the '''[[WP:ANI|Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents]]''' and start a thread, using '''[[WP:DIFF|diffs]]''' to illustrate the incivility of the others. '''''Be sure to notify the editors you are reporting.''''' If admins agree that the others' behavior is out of line, those editors may be blocked; this may make it easier to make the changes you want, at least in the short term.