Template:Criticism-section
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
It has been suggested that some of the information in this article's Criticism or Controversy section(s) be merged into other sections to achieve a more neutral presentation. (Discuss) |
Template documentation[edit] Description
This template is meant for articles with Criticism, Controversy or similar sections that segregate all the negatives into one place and leave the other sections overly positive.
Although present in many articles, and sometimes appropriate, this style of writing is not generally recommended. When inappropriate, such sections should be considered a temporary solution until the article can be structured more neutrally, with criticism moved into each relevant section. This does not imply that criticism should be removed from the article; only that the current organization of content on the page results in an unbalanced presentation.
In many cases they [criticism sections] are necessary, and in many cases they are not necessary.
And I agree with the view expressed by others that often, they are a symptom of bad writing. That is, it isn't that we should not include the criticisms, but that the information should be properly incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms.
Separating all the controversial aspects of a topic into a single section results in a very tortured form of writing, especially a back-and-forth dialogue between "proponents" and "opponents". It also creates a hierarchy of fact — the main passage is "true" and "undisputed", whereas the rest are "controversial" and therefore more likely to be false, an implication that may often be inappropriate.
Since many of the topics in an encyclopedia will inevitably encounter controversy, editors should attempt to write in a manner that folds debates into the narrative rather than "distilling" them out into separate sections that ignore each other.
Sometimes the internal structure of an article may require additional attention to protect neutrality and avoid problems like POV forks and Undue Weight. Examples that may warrant attention include: articles that "segregate" text or other content into different regions or subsections, based solely on the apparent POV of the content itself;7
7 Article sections devoted solely to criticism, or "pro and con" sections within articles are two commonly cited examples. There are varying views on whether and to what extent such kinds of article structure are appropriate. (See e.g., Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Article_structure, Wikipedia:Pro_&_con_lists, Wikipedia_talk:Pro_&_con_lists, Template:Criticism-section)..
[edit] Usage
Place {{criticism-section}} at the top of the section.
This template sorts articles into Category:Cleanup from section.
[edit] See also
- {{trivia}}
