309:
56:
119:
907:). Avoid mixed bag section titles like "Controversies" without it being clear in the section title (or in the titles of the subsections of such section) what these controversies are about. If the content of such a section is of the "mixed bag" kind, the section should be handled as a trivia section (see
789:
guidelines; that is, the criticism itself should be the subject of independent, reliable sources. Such articles should not be a repository of all things critical, but a review of significant sources of criticism. This style of article is generally discouraged, but it is sometimes used for political,
378:
For example, if a politician received significant criticism about their public image, create a section entitled "Public image" or "Public profile", and include all related information—positive and negative—within that section. If a book was heavily criticized, create a section in the book's article
618:
With this approach, the article contains a section dedicated to positive and negative assessments of the topic. The section should not use a negative title like "Criticism" or "Controversies" but instead should use a more neutral term such as "Reception", "Assessment", "Reviews", "Influence", or
931:
weighed in on the question: "In many cases 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
922:
A section dedicated to negative material is sometimes appropriate, if the sources treat the negative material as an organic whole, and if readers would be better served by seeing all the negative material in one location. However, sections dedicated to negative material may violate the NPOV policy
152:
In most cases separate sections devoted to criticism, controversies, or the like should be avoided in an article because these sections call undue attention to negative viewpoints. Articles should present the prevailing viewpoints from reliable sources, whether positive or negative. Segregation of
977:
A dedicated "Reception history" or "History of criticism" article may be acceptable for certain literary, historical, or artistic topics, if the sources justify it. Such articles should describe the historical progression of the criticism, as well as documenting both the positive and negative
875:
Often the best approach to incorporating negative criticism into the encyclopedia is to integrate it into the article, in a way that does not disrupt the article's flow. The article should be divided into sections based on topics, timeline, or theme – not viewpoint. Negative criticism should be
382:
Articles on artists and works by artists often include material describing the opinions of critics, peers, and reviewers. Although the term "criticism" can, in that context, include both positive and negative assessment, the word "Criticism" or "Accolades" should be avoided in section titles
153:
text or other content into different subsections, based solely on the apparent POV of the content itself, may result in an unencyclopedic structure, such as a back-and-forth dialogue between proponents and opponents. There is no requirement to include criticism or controversies in an article.
884:
An acceptable approach to including criticisms in
Knowledge articles is to separate the description of a topic from a description of how the topic was received. Suitable section titles, depending on case, include: "Reception", "Response", "Reviews" and "Reactions". These sections include both
394:
Criticisms and controversies are two distinct concepts, and they should not be commingled. Criticisms are specific appraisals or assessments, whereas controversies are protracted public disputes, with opposing opinions rather than universal disapproval. Thus, sections such as "Criticisms and
968:
Similarly, sections dedicated to positive material may violate the NPOV policy by causing a distortion, albeit in the opposite direction and maybe a promotional editing and public relations editing magnet especially in articles on people, products, businesses and organizations.
145:(NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. If significant views include negative criticism of the article subject published in
959:
Sometimes a section is created to describe a significant criticism made by a notable critic. In these situations, the section title should be something like "View of Maria Smith" or "Reaction of the NY Times", and should avoid the word "criticism" in the section title.
285:: even if third-party reliable sources are generally negative about a topic this shouldn't impede devoting sufficient space to a fair description of the topic, for instance (partially) based on primary or self-published sources, within the limits of policy.
935:
Many criticism sections found in articles are present because editors collected negative material, but have not had the time to properly integrate the negative material into the other sections of the article. Such negative sections should be tagged with a
648:
as supported by the sources. The topic of the controversy is best named in the section title (when there are distinct groups of controversies, the section title can be "Controversies", with subsection titles indicating what these are about).
386:
In some situations the term "criticism" may be appropriate in an article or section title, for example, if there is a large body of critical material, and if independent secondary sources comment, analyze or discuss the critical material.
876:
interwoven throughout the topical or thematic sections. However, for example, when the structure of an article is timeline-based "criticism" can't precede the genesis history of the subject (except possibly for a mentioning in the lede).
390:
Sections or article titles should generally not include the word "controversies". Instead, titles should simply name the event, for example, "2009 boycott" or "Hunting incident". The word "controversy" should not appear in the title.
676:
In this approach, the article contains a section which focuses only on negative criticisms. This approach is sometimes used for politics, religion and philosophy topics. Great care should be taken that the section is not an
584:
Often it is best to integrate the negative criticism into the article: negative information is woven throughout the article in the appropriate topical sections. The article does not have a dedicated "Criticism" section.
375:
Other than for articles about particular worldviews, philosophies or religious topics etc. where different considerations apply (see below), best practice is to incorporate positive and negative material into the same
554:. Integrating criticism into the main article can cause confusion because readers may misconstrue the critical material as representative of the philosophy's outlook, the political stance, or the religion's tenets.
761:
Use the term "controversy" in an article title only when this is part of the common name of the topic of that article, and the controversy is notable in its own right (as opposed to being part of a larger topic)
383:
because it may convey a biased connotation to many readers. Alternative section titles which avoid a negative connotation include "Reception", "Reviews", "Responses", "Reactions", "Critiques", and "Assessments".
1002:
Articles dedicated to controversies about a topic are generally discouraged, for many of the same reasons discussed for criticism-related material. Articles dedicated to a controversy may be appropriate if the
202:
The prominence and proportion of coverage on negative or positive materials should reflect those of what is published in reliable sources. Prominence among
Knowledge editors or the general public are irrelevant.
724:
This approach employs a separate article that includes both positive and negative viewpoints. This approach is often taken when the primary article on a literary topic grows too large and is subject to a
1093:
899:
For a specific controversy regarding the topic, when such topic takes a prominent place in the reliable sources on the topic. "Controversy" is not necessarily part of the name of such a section (e.g.
299:
373:. Sections within an article dedicated to negative criticisms are normally also discouraged. Topical or thematic sections are frequently superior to sections devoted to criticism.
1031:
Creating separate articles with the sole purpose of grouping the criticisms or to elaborate individual points of criticism on a certain topic is generally considered a POV fork.
1035:
states that "Knowledge articles should not be split into multiple articles solely so each can advocate a different stance on the subject." For example, the "Criticism" section of
249:
885:
negative and positive assessments. This approach usually conforms to the WP neutrality policy, because it avoids being "all negative" or "exclusively laudatory" about the topic.
495:
227:
Integrate negative material into sections that cover all viewpoints of the event, product, or policy that is being criticized, rather than in a dedicated "criticism" section.
242:
Negative material about living persons may violate privacy policies or damage the person's reputation; therefore, strict rules are in place to govern such information. See
430:
398:
1012:
769:
485:
997:
861:
427:). Generally, new subarticles should not be devoted to criticism, controversies, or other specific viewpoints but should instead focus on topical themes.
403:
The best approach to including negative criticism is to integrate it into the primary article on the topic. Sometimes that will cause the article to get
1026:
748:
358:
An article dedicated to negative criticism of a topic, as well as one dedicated to accolades and praises is usually discouraged because it tends to be
258:
should be given to criticism. Some policies and guidelines that help determine the amount and presentation (or: weight) of criticism in an article:
1047:
are sometimes appropriate for organizations, businesses, philosophies, religions, or political outlooks, provided the sources justify it; see the
1085:
879:
870:
744:
317:
888:
17:
1191:
963:
917:
265:: the weight a Knowledge article gives to criticism of its subject should be proportionate to the overall weight of such criticisms in
908:
71:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
1110:
1080:
370:
465:
to the controversies or criticisms, then sections and subarticles about them may be justified, but only within the limitations of
1141:
972:
453:
Many organizations and corporations are involved in well-documented controversies or may be subject to significant criticism. If
243:
237:
157:
927:
dominating the article but may simplify maintenance of the article if unhelpful edits are limited to a single section. In 2006,
1016:
605:
1196:
644:
For a specific controversy that is broadly covered in reliable sources. Various positions, whether pro or contra, are given
904:
1007:
on the topic discuss the controversies as an independent topic. Examples of articles devoted to a controversy include
841:
652:
489:
296:
The list of suggestions above is not comprehensive, it shows a few directions where additional guidance may be found.
1175:
72:
631:
1120:
1075:
168:
627:
845:
692:
480:
is very long and it was deemed unpractical to integrate all the controversy material into the main article: the
821:
557:
982:
type of section summarizing the "reception history", and properly linking to the subsidiary article (for the
817:
736:
76:
1070:
1098:
1065:
829:
790:
religious, and philosophical topics that draw significant opposition. In all cases, the article must be
1008:
950:
773:
275:: don't split off articles with the purpose of purging a Knowledge article of its legitimate criticism.
662:
657:
1032:
1020:
932:
incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms."
740:
704:
696:
678:
979:
849:
809:
623:
523:
408:
173:
Most problems with negative material can be avoided by adhering to standard WP policies, such as
149:, then they should be incorporated into the article content in an appropriate and neutral way.
30:
This page is about material that emphasizes negative criticism. For criticism of
Knowledge, see
987:
857:
853:
732:
726:
412:
404:
221:
31:
1146:
712:
894:
813:
805:
765:
349:
1040:
940:
837:
825:
551:
477:
473:
416:
35:
708:
688:
509:
101:
8:
1115:
1044:
466:
342:
278:
160:
requires exercising special care in presenting negative viewpoints about living persons.
42:
444:
326:
in editing this section, but that it would be a good idea to check the discussion first.
94:
1160:
1104:
924:
550:) – it will usually be appropriate to have a "Criticism" section or "Criticism of ..."
501:
436:
359:
334:
231:
206:
86:
619:"Response". This approach is often found in articles on books or other works of art.
795:
424:
323:
282:
272:
262:
146:
132:
185:. When including negative material in an article, some things to check for include:
79:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
983:
928:
289:
64:
684:
700:
379:
called "Reception", and include positive and negative material in that section.
255:
214:
196:
178:
128:
900:
791:
527:
182:
142:
1185:
645:
420:
363:
127:
Articles should include significant criticisms of the subject while avoiding
956:
to notify other editors that more work is needed to integrate the material.
476:
often describe its controversies in detail, as an independent topic. As the
1094:
Knowledge:Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability
1004:
601:
543:
481:
454:
266:
210:
190:
163:
786:
174:
531:
205:
Always present positive viewpoints along with any negative information
1169:
562:
Approaches to incorporating controversy and criticism are as follows:
224:, so that the criticism is not presented in the encyclopedia's voice.
41:
For the policy on naming "Criticisms of X" articles or sections, see
914:
As of
October 2022 about 33,000 articles have controversy sections.
518:
For topics about a particular point of view – such as philosophies (
589:
519:
300:
Avoid sections and articles focusing on criticisms or controversies
1036:
991:
593:
547:
535:
322:
Please feel free to join in. This doesn't mean that you may not
222:
name the source of the criticism within the paragraph or sentence
1059:
923:
and may be a troll magnet, which can be harmful if it leads to
539:
1126:
250:
Amount and presentation of criticism: other related guidance
27:
Essay/guideline on criticism sections and criticism articles
666:(with subsection titles "General media" and "Award shows")
597:
1054:
486:
Concerns and controversies over the 2008 Summer
Olympics
1178:– Google search for "Criticism of ..." within Knowledge
220:
When presenting negative material, it is often best to
1048:
492:
of the controversies is retained in the main article.
292:
may instruct how to handle criticism in certain areas.
862:
Criticism of government response to
Hurricane Katrina
141:
All encyclopedic content on
Knowledge must adhere to
1111:
Knowledge:Neutral point of view § Article structure
1039:
should not be moved to a separate article such as "
749:
Responses to the 2006 Duke
University lacrosse case
423:to link to the new subarticles (related guidance:
407:, in which case the article should be split using
1049:"Philosophy, religion, or politics" section above
1183:
1089:(the phrase doesn't mean what you think it does)
905:Rick Ross (consultant)#Jason Scott deprogramming
411:. The preferred way to split an article is as a
785:An article dedicated to criticism should pass
745:Influence and reception of Friedrich Nietzsche
653:Michael Collins Piper#Antisemitism controversy
199:beyond the emphasis given in reliable sources.
978:criticisms. The "main" article should have a
1176:intitle:"criticism of" site:en.wikipedia.org
395:controversies" are generally inappropriate.
998:Separate articles devoted to controversies
909:Knowledge:Manual of Style/Trivia sections
658:Mel Gibson#Alcohol abuse and legal issues
371:article structure must protect neutrality
189:Ensure that the material is supported by
1081:Knowledge:Copyediting reception sections
1086:Knowledge:Don't "teach the controversy"
988:"Studies and reception history" section
362:, which is generally prohibited by the
238:Knowledge:Biographies of living persons
158:policy on biographies of living persons
14:
1184:
1027:Separate articles devoted to criticism
1017:Chiropractic controversy and criticism
472:Example: the sources that discuss the
1045:Dedicated "Criticism of ..." articles
303:
113:
50:
558:Approaches to presenting criticism
24:
842:Criticism of Amnesty International
77:thoroughly vetted by the community
73:Knowledge's policies or guidelines
25:
1208:
1192:Knowledge essays about neutrality
871:Integrated throughout the article
496:Philosophy, religion, or politics
459:other than the critics themselves
195:Do not present the material in a
1121:Special:PrefixIndex/Criticism of
1076:Knowledge:Controversial articles
484:was used to create a subarticle
307:
117:
54:
846:Criticism of the United Nations
461:– provide substantial coverage
316:This section is the subject of
179:balancing the content carefully
1154:
1147:Tweet by "depths of wikipedia"
1133:
822:Criticism of the War on Terror
431:Organizations and corporations
399:When an article gets too large
269:on the subject of the article.
13:
1:
818:Criticism of multiculturalism
737:Reception of J. R. R. Tolkien
628:In Search of Lost Time (book)
244:Biographies of living persons
1197:Knowledge essays about style
1071:Knowledge:Be neutral in form
802:Philosophy/Politics/Religion
364:neutral point-of-view policy
169:Neutrality and verifiability
18:Knowledge:Criticism sections
7:
1099:Knowledge:Pro and con lists
1066:Knowledge:Avoid thread mode
1013:2008 Olympics controversies
830:Criticism of Libertarianism
770:2008 Olympics controversies
564:
409:the WP splitting guidelines
10:
1213:
1009:Global warming controversy
973:Reception history articles
925:users with strong opinions
892:
781:"Criticism of ..." article
774:Global warming controversy
499:
434:
332:
235:
183:writing in an unbiased way
84:
48:Essay on editing Knowledge
40:
29:
1033:Knowledge:Content forking
1021:Scientology controversies
573:
570:
567:
288:Specific guidelines like
880:"Reception" type section
741:Shakespeare's reputation
663:Kanye West#Controversies
125:This page in a nutshell:
850:Criticism of Greenpeace
810:Criticism of capitalism
530:), political outlooks (
482:summary style guideline
858:Criticism of Microsoft
854:Criticism of Coca-Cola
733:Reception of WikiLeaks
32:Criticism of Knowledge
889:"Controversy" section
814:Criticism of religion
806:Criticisms of Marxism
766:Gamergate controversy
757:"Controversy" article
640:"Controversy" section
143:neutral point of view
75:, as it has not been
1041:Criticism of Al Gore
986:example this is the
838:Criticism of the BBC
826:Criticism of atheism
681:list of complaints.
474:2008 Summer Olympics
360:a point-of-view fork
318:a current discussion
36:Knowledge:Criticisms
1116:Category:Criticisms
964:"Accolades" section
918:"Criticism" section
720:"Reception" article
672:"Criticism" section
614:"Reception" section
197:way that emphasizes
1105:Policy and content
901:Antibiotics#Misuse
794:and must not be a
693:Planned Parenthood
624:Catcher in the Rye
490:a summary overview
175:using good sources
1090:
951:criticism-section
868:
867:
792:written neutrally
679:WP:INDISCRIMINATE
331:
330:
217:to one viewpoint.
209:in proportion to
139:
138:
112:
111:
16:(Redirected from
1204:
1163:
1158:
1152:
1149:5/6 October 2022
1137:
1088:
1005:reliable sources
984:Tacitean studies
955:
949:
945:
939:
665:
565:
538:), or religion (
512:
455:reliable sources
447:
352:
345:
311:
310:
304:
267:reliable sources
211:reliable sources
191:reliable sources
164:Adhere to policy
147:reliable sources
121:
120:
114:
104:
97:
58:
57:
51:
21:
1212:
1211:
1207:
1206:
1205:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1182:
1181:
1172:
1167:
1166:
1159:
1155:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1107:
1062:
1057:
1029:
1000:
975:
966:
953:
947:
943:
937:
920:
897:
891:
882:
873:
661:
560:
516:
515:
508:
504:
498:
451:
450:
443:
439:
433:
421:"main" template
401:
356:
355:
348:
341:
337:
327:
308:
302:
252:
240:
234:
213:without giving
207:to give balance
171:
166:
118:
108:
107:
100:
93:
89:
81:
80:
55:
49:
46:
39:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1210:
1200:
1199:
1194:
1180:
1179:
1171:
1170:External links
1168:
1165:
1164:
1153:
1151:
1150:
1144:
1131:
1130:
1128:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1118:
1113:
1106:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1096:
1091:
1083:
1078:
1073:
1068:
1061:
1058:
1056:
1053:
1028:
1025:
999:
996:
974:
971:
965:
962:
919:
916:
895:WP:CONTROVERSY
890:
887:
881:
878:
872:
869:
866:
865:
799:
783:
777:
776:
763:
759:
753:
752:
730:
722:
716:
715:
689:Existentialism
682:
674:
668:
667:
656:
650:
642:
636:
635:
620:
616:
610:
609:
586:
582:
576:
575:
572:
569:
559:
556:
528:Existentialism
514:
513:
505:
500:
497:
494:
449:
448:
440:
435:
432:
429:
400:
397:
369:Likewise, the
354:
353:
346:
338:
333:
329:
328:
314:
312:
301:
298:
294:
293:
286:
276:
270:
251:
248:
233:
232:Living persons
230:
229:
228:
225:
218:
203:
200:
193:
170:
167:
165:
162:
137:
136:
122:
110:
109:
106:
105:
98:
90:
85:
82:
70:
69:
61:
59:
47:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1209:
1198:
1195:
1193:
1190:
1189:
1187:
1177:
1174:
1173:
1162:
1157:
1148:
1145:
1143:
1140:
1139:
1136:
1132:
1122:
1119:
1117:
1114:
1112:
1109:
1108:
1100:
1097:
1095:
1092:
1087:
1084:
1082:
1079:
1077:
1074:
1072:
1069:
1067:
1064:
1063:
1052:
1051:for details.
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1024:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1006:
995:
993:
989:
985:
981:
980:summary style
970:
961:
957:
952:
942:
933:
930:
926:
915:
912:
910:
906:
902:
896:
886:
877:
864:
863:
859:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
834:Organizations
831:
827:
823:
819:
815:
811:
807:
803:
800:
797:
793:
788:
784:
782:
779:
778:
775:
771:
767:
764:
760:
758:
755:
754:
750:
746:
742:
738:
734:
731:
728:
723:
721:
718:
717:
714:
710:
706:
702:
698:
694:
690:
686:
683:
680:
675:
673:
670:
669:
664:
659:
654:
651:
647:
643:
641:
638:
637:
634:
633:
629:
625:
621:
617:
615:
612:
611:
608:
607:
606:Bill O'Reilly
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
581:
578:
577:
566:
563:
555:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
511:
507:
506:
503:
493:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
470:
468:
464:
460:
456:
446:
442:
441:
438:
428:
426:
422:
418:
414:
410:
406:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
377:
372:
367:
365:
361:
351:
347:
344:
340:
339:
336:
325:
321:
319:
313:
306:
305:
297:
291:
287:
284:
280:
277:
274:
271:
268:
264:
261:
260:
259:
257:
247:
246:for details.
245:
239:
226:
223:
219:
216:
212:
208:
204:
201:
198:
194:
192:
188:
187:
186:
184:
180:
176:
161:
159:
154:
150:
148:
144:
134:
130:
126:
123:
116:
115:
103:
99:
96:
92:
91:
88:
83:
78:
74:
68:
66:
60:
53:
52:
44:
37:
33:
19:
1156:
1135:
1030:
1001:
976:
967:
958:
934:
921:
913:
898:
883:
874:
833:
832:
801:
780:
756:
727:content fork
719:
671:
639:
622:
613:
602:George Soros
588:
579:
571:Description
561:
544:Christianity
517:
478:main article
471:
467:WP:BLPGROUPS
462:
458:
452:
413:content fork
402:
393:
389:
385:
381:
374:
368:
357:
315:
295:
279:WP:ABOUTSELF
256:undue weight
253:
241:
215:undue weight
172:
156:Knowledge's
155:
151:
140:
129:undue weight
124:
62:
43:WP:POVNAMING
1161:Jimbo Wales
941:POV-section
929:Jimbo Wales
713:Creationism
697:Materialism
632:2001 (film)
417:subarticles
350:WP:CSECTION
236:Main page:
133:POV forking
63:This is an
1186:Categories
994:article).
893:See also:
787:notability
685:World bank
646:due weight
580:Integrated
552:subarticle
532:Capitalism
524:Naturalism
425:WP:SPINOFF
419:, using a
283:WP:PRIMARY
273:WP:POVFORK
263:WP:BALASPS
1127:Footnotes
574:Examples
568:Approach
510:WP:CRITSP
405:too large
335:Shortcuts
290:WP:FRINGE
102:WP:NOCRIT
87:Shortcuts
1055:See also
796:POV fork
709:Eugenics
590:Abortion
520:Idealism
502:Shortcut
488:, while
437:Shortcut
376:section.
343:WP:CRITS
1142:dataset
1037:Al Gore
992:Tacitus
990:in the
594:Slavery
548:Atheism
536:Marxism
463:devoted
445:WP:CORG
324:be bold
95:WP:CRIT
1060:Essays
1019:, and
705:Oracle
181:, and
1043:".
701:Exxon
540:Islam
415:into
65:essay
743:,
630:,
626:,
598:PETA
281:and
131:and
34:and
946:or
911:).
840:,
804:–
739:,
691:,
604:,
469:.
254:No
1188::
1023:.
1015:,
1011:,
954:}}
948:{{
944:}}
938:{{
903:,
860:,
856:,
852:,
848:,
844:,
836:–
828:,
824:,
820:,
816:,
812:,
808:,
798:.
772:,
768:,
751:,
747:,
735:,
729:.
711:,
707:,
703:,
699:,
695:,
687:,
660:,
600:,
596:,
592:,
546:,
542:,
534:,
526:,
522:,
457:–
366:.
177:,
655:,
320:.
135:.
67:.
45:.
38:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.