Forum:Bad words in articles

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Bad words in articles
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 10 April 2010 by Calebchiam.

Just couldn't resist the title, and yet it is appropriate enough. I just want to remind our editors that NPOV means if something in an article is based on opinion, it does not belong. Look for a way to say what you want without resorting to opinion. Some key words I see all too often are

  • the best (worst) way to do something. Can you change it to fastest? Or some other word that is measurable?
  • interestingly, oddly, strangely. Some people may disagree. Ironic can be used at times but should be linked to what makes it ironic. These can often be removed entirely without affecting the sentence.
  • should, advise(d), suggest(ed). We tell people how to do it, give them all the info to make up thier minds. There is often enough several ways to accomplish something so it is rare (except in quest and other guides) that this word should be in an article. If we say this creature is immune to melee then we don't need to add so range or mage is suggested.

And now I am in brain lock, I had a whole list of words and can't rememberr the others. I am sure other folk will realize what I mean, go ahead and add them to the list.--Degenret01 10:04, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

  • Support - At first glance I thought this was going to be another "amg dey say fuck im [email protected] lets ban swaring" proposal, but I agree with most of what you said, except for "interestingly". I think it can be neutral to say something is interesting. Slayer helmet.png 20:45, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
  • Support - I totally agree with you. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:06, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
  • Neutral - Suggestions, like the ones you've listed, can be helpful in guides, but I guess we could change it to something more NPOV but just as useful, in most cases. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 23:08, December 3, 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This would make most articles boring. POV is what gives most articles their own unique and specialized "flair", if you will. While I discourage and condemn relentless POVing, a little bit of style shouldn't harm anyone. RSWiki shouldn't have to sound like a monotonous conformist robotic voice all the time. Just my 2 cents. --Fruit.Smoothie 04:04, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Comment This is not for opposing or supporting, I am simply clarifying what NPOV includes for those who misunderstand it. And Fruit, go for all the style you want, if you read our articles many are great WITHOUT pov. You can say something is efficient or fast or slow or ineffective or effective, as these are all tangibles. The words I have on the list are ones where in an article people may disagree with them and therefore change the article, and we could (and HAVE had) edit wars over them. --Degenret01 04:48, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

For guides We just tell them what to do, so we don't have to say it is the best or worst or whatever. --Degenret01 04:49, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Support points 1 and 2, but strong oppose point 3 - If we got rid of the suggestions/recommendations, that would defeat the purpose of using this as a guide. It's really useful being able to know what works "best" (e.g. what to bring for my first KBD trip, recommended teleports for quests, etc.). ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  05:56, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Telos, strong oppose for point #3. I was noticing earlier today how well our articles present POV: typically, a sentence begins with "It is recommended...", which is a formal way of presenting popular opinion and grabs the reader's attention. Suggestions are very helpful especially when doing quests or hunting monsters. What differentiates us from most fansites is that we have articles with suggestions and recommendations on nearly everything, whereas most other sites simply provide barebones information (and far less than we do, at that). I was looking for a good strategy for Impetuous Impulses and all Tip.It and Rune HQ had were guides that listed types of implings, possible rewards, etc., while we actually had a strategy section which recommended a specific way of playing the minigame. Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk08:11, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

I AM NOT AGAINST OR OPPOSED TO GUIDES Had to get that out before I get banned as antiwikian or something. What I am saying is use a different word choice so that you are following ALREADY EXISTING POLICY. For guides say effective, efficient, successful . These are measureable and not subjective so they fit with both suppying information and staying true to being a wiki project.--Degenret01 08:32, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

There is not necessarily always an objective way of measuring effectiveness, efficiency, or success. While I don't particularly like the word "best" (and "oddly", "interestingly", and "strangely" should all certainly be banned), I do believe that POV should be included in articles, as long as it is presented in a clear manner. Something like "The best way to do X is Y" is not the type of POV content we should have, but something like "It is recommended to do X because..." not alerts the reader that this is a POV, and not strictly factual. I think that our policy is effective in its current form. Frankly, some people do need it spelled out to them that "As this creature is immune to melee, it is necessary to use mage or ranged." Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk09:08, December 4, 2009 (UTC)
What if we said, "this money making method is best in terms of speed and money earned"? Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 10:15, December 4, 2009 (UTC)
That is totally perfect. You can back it up with data and therefore it cannot be disputed. Well, it can't be disputed by people who understand numbers anyhow lol.--Degenret01 10:49, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Support I would urge everyone to read Avoid weasel words and Avoid peacock terms, two of Wikipedia's policies that make a lot of sense, and set high standards that we should aspire to (IMHO). I totally repudiate the suggestion that articles need a "POV" (also called an "angle", or "spin") to add flair. This is an encyclopaedia first and foremost, not a collection of journalistic meanderings, and RS:NPOV is there for a reason. It is hardly ever correct to say that something is "ironic", since irony rarely occurs in real life, but is used as a device in fiction (as such, it could occur in RuneScape quest storylines, but be careful with it). Words like "interestingly" should not be used either, since the reader can decide for himself what is interesting - we usually only need to state the facts. I think we need to tighten our standards, and incorporate this into the style guide. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 19:10, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

I have taken a good read over those pages, and I like every single one of them. I expecially liked the "let the reader decide" policy. Some people have different opinions on what is interesting or not. Another link on there to the "Words to avoid" article also has a list of quite a bit of words that can imply a biased statement. It also states how they may be biased, and words to replace them with to remove bias. The link, wikipedia:Wikipedia:Words to avoid. I agree that we should add it into the style guide. ~MuzTalk 21:18, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Opinion - I for one think that the Desert Treasure quest guide could use this sort of treatment -- not all of us are mage pures. I tried to use that guide and lost a full set of Ahrims (sp?), and then just used a whip and Proselyte gear, and beat Kharil without even breathing hard. If someone with my levels tried to use that guide today, they would be very disappointed in the results. --TheLastWordSword 17:00, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - The discussion was more of a reminder than an actual proposal, also currently being continued in Forum:Guides and NPOV. C.ChiamTalk 04:49, April 10, 2010 (UTC)