Wikipedia:Editing policy: Difference between revisions

Wikipedia ''[[WP:NOTEVERYTHING|summarizes]]'' accepted knowledge. As a rule, the more accepted knowledge it can encapsulate, the better it is. Please [[WP:Be bold|boldly]] add content summarizing accepted knowledge, and be particularly cautious about removing sourced content. It is Wikipedia policy that information in Wikipedia should be [[WP:Verifiability|verifiable]] and must [[WP:No original research|not be original research]]. Show that content is verifiable by referencing [[WP:reliable sources|reliable sources]]. Because a lack of content is better than misleading or false content, unsourced content may be challenged and [[WP:BURDEN|removed]]. To avoid such challenges, the best practice is to provide an [[WP:inline citation|inline citation]] when adding content (see: [[WP:Citing sources]] for instructions on how to do this, or ask for help at the [[WP:Help desk|Help desk]]).

Wikipedia respects others' copyright. Although content must be backed by reliable sources, [[WP:Copying text from other sources|avoid copying]] or [[WP:Close paraphrasing|closely paraphrasing]] a copyrighted source. You should read the source, understand it, and then express what it says in your own words. An exception exists for the often necessary use of short quotations; they must be enclosed in quotations marks, accompanied by an inline reference to the source, and usually attributed to the author. (See the [[FairWikipedia:Non-free content|fair use]] doctrine]] which allows limited quoting without permission.)

''Perfection is not required'': [[WP:WIPWikipedia is a work in progress|Wikipedia is a work in progress]]. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. For instance, one person may start an article with an overview of a subject or a few random facts. Another may help standardize the article's formatting or have additional facts and figures or a graphic to add. Yet another may bring better [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight|balance]] to the views represented in the article and perform fact-checking and [[WP:CITECiting sources|sourcing]] to existing content. At any point during this process, the article may become disorganized or contain substandard writing.

Although ''perfection is not required'', extra care should be taken on articles that mention living persons. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should either be verified immediately, with one or more reliable sources and presented in a [[WP:NPOVNeutral point of view|neutral manner]] without [[WP:UNDUE|undue weight]], or be removed immediately, without waiting for discussion.

''Great Wikipedia articles come from a succession of editors' efforts. Rather than remove imperfect content outright, fix problems if you can, [[WP:CLEANUPTAGTemplate index/Cleanup|tag]] or excise them if you can't.''

As explained [[#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required|above]], Wikipedia is a work in progress and perfection is not required. As long as any of the facts or ideas added to an article [[WP:ONUS|would belong]] in the "finished" article, they [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|should be retained]] if they meet the three article[[Wikipedia:core content retentionpolicies|core content policies]]: [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|Neutral point of view]] (which does not mean [[WP:YESPOV|no point of view]]), [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|Verifiability]], and [[Wikipedia:No original research|No original research]].

If you think an article needs to be rewritten or changed substantially, [[WP:BOLDBe bold|go ahead and do so]], but it is best to [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#How to use article talk pages|leave a comment]] about why you made the changes on the [[Help:Talk pages|article's talk page]].

* [[Wikipedia:Template messagesindex/Cleanup|Tagging]] it as necessary

* [[WP:MERGEMerging|Merging]] or moving the content to a more relevant existing article, or [[WP:SSSplitting|splitting]] the content to [[HHelp:YFAYour first article|an entirely new article]]

* [[WPWikipedia:YESPOVNeutral point of view|Adding another point of view]] to the existing points of view to make the article more balanced

* Requesting a citation by adding the {{tl|citation needed}} tag, or adding any other [[Template:Inlineinline cleanup tags|appropriate cleanup tags]] asto appropriatecontent you cannot fix yourself

* Fixing errors in [[Help:wikitext|wikitext]] or formatting

{{Anchor|REMOVE}}Several of our core policies discuss situations when it ''might'' be more appropriate to remove information from an article rather than preserve it. [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] discusses handling unsourced and contentious material; [[Wikipedia:No original research]] discusses the need to remove original research; [[WPWikipedia:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]] describes material that is fundamentally inappropriate for Wikipedia; and [[WPWikipedia:UNDUEUndue weight]] discusses how to balance material that gives undue weight to a particular viewpoint, which might include removal of trivia, tiny minority viewpoints, or material that cannot be supported with high-quality sources. Also, redundancy within an article should be kept to a minimum (exceptingexcept in the [[WPWikipedia:LEADManual of Style/Lead section|lead]], which is meant to be a summary of the entire article, and so is intentionally duplicative).

[[WP:Libel|Libel]], [[WP:Patent nonsense|nonsense]], and [[WP:vandalism|vandalism]] should be completely removed, as should material that [[Wikipedia:Copyright violations|violates copyright]] and material for which no reliable source that supports it has ever been [[Wikipedia:Published|published]].

''[[Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages|Be bold in updating articles]], especially for [[Help:Minor edit|minor changes]], fixing problems, and changes that you believe are [[wikipedia:Likely to be challenged|unlikely]] to be controversial]].'' Previous authors do not need to be consulted before making changes. [[WP:OWNOwnership of content|Nobody owns articles]], so if you see an improvement you can make, make it.

If you think the edit might be controversial, then a better course of action may be to first [[Help:Introduction to talk pages/1|make a proposal on the talk page]]. Bold editing does not excuse edits against [[WP:CONSENSUSConsensus|existing consensus]], edits in violation of core policies, such as [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|Neutral point of view]] and [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|Verifiability]], or edits designed to create a [[Wikipedia:Fait accompli|''fait accompli'']], where actions are justified by the fact they have already been carried out.

''Be helpful: explain your changes''. When you edit an article, the more radical or controversial the change, the greater the need to explain it. Be sure to leave a comment about ''why'' you made the change. Try to use an appropriate [[Help:Edit summary|edit summary]]. For larger or more significant changes, the edit summary may not give you enough space to fully explain the edit; in this case, you may leave a note on the [[WikipediaHelp:Talk pagepages|article's talk page]] as well. Remember too that notes on the talk page are more visible, make misunderstandings less likely and encourage discussion rather than [[WP:EWEdit warring|edit warring]].

''Be cautious about making a major change to an article.'' Prevent [[WP:EWEdit warring|edit warring]] by discussing such edits first on the [[Help:Talk pages|article's talk page]]. One editor's idea of an improvement may be another editor's idea of a desecration. If you choose to be [[WP:BOLDbe bold|be bold]], try to justify your change in detail on the article talk page, so as to avoid an edit war. Before making a major change, consider first creating a new draft on a [[Wikipedia:User_pages#SUB|subpage of your own user page]] and then link to it on the article's talk page so as to facilitate a new discussion.