Wikipedia:Rhetoric

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is part of the Manual of Style, and is considered a guideline for Wikipedia. The consensus of many editors formed the conventions described here. Wikipedia articles should heed these guidelines. Feel free to update this page as needed, but please use the discussion page to propose major changes.

Rhetoric has little use anywhere in Wikipedia, and should always be used with extreme caution.

The Greeks distinguished rhetoric, the art of reasoning persuasively, from logic, the art of reasoning correctly. Both were considered admirable accomplishments. Wikipedia is different. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is concerned both with accuracy, so logical thinking and writing is always encouraged, and also with neutral point of view, so in the text of an article rhetoric has no place at all.

In talk pages, the project namespace and other areas outside the article namespace, rhetoric should be used with great caution. State your point don't prove it is considered good Wiki etiquette.

A difficulty arises because nobody wants either the discussion or the articles to be boring either. The line between rhetoric and good interesting writing can be hard to draw.

In articles, one answer to this is to use the wit of others, by including quotes from authorities in the field. However this brings the danger that these quotations, if persuasive, can be used to support a point of view. One answer to this is to be aware of your own point of view, and to use quotations from those who take the opposite stance. This is far safer than quoting those whose views you share. You are unlikely to quote them in such a way that the view you do not hold is promoted.

In namespaces other than the article namespace, humour is widely appreciated, but needs to avoid being personal attack. If a joke is at someone's expense, the question to ask is, Will the victim think this is funny?, and if you are not confident that they will, avoid the joke. Jokes designed to disempower an opponent are good rhetoric, but poor wiki etiquette and contrary to Wikipedia policy.

The difference between a prejudice and a conviction is you can explain a conviction without getting mad. - Marginal note in Readers Digest.

See also Wikilove.