Wikipedia has several important styles, source, and tone requirements:
- sources must generally be secondary sources;
- no original research,
- analysis or opinion of your own can be included;
- articles (and contributors) must maintain a neutral point of view (NPOV);
- the tone should not be argumentative;
- and a range of information and, when relevant, perspectives must be included.
Relatedly, Wikipedia has a notability requirement. For an article to be worthy of inclusion on the site,
- whom or whatever it is about must be considered notable.
- For a topic to be deemed notable, there need to be sourced from which to draw information.
- Given the requirement to use secondary sources (overreliance on news articles, for example, is not a good practice and may raise a red flag),
what limitations might this policy impose on historical events, individuals, movements, or concepts/ideas that have not been given much attention and therefore are not included in any secondary sources from which to draw information?
The NPOV policy imposes creates similar questions or challenges.
Consider what ‘neutral point of view’ means – what counts as neutral? And what does that mean in the context of feminist epistemology (Narayan)?
Order a similar paper here
Or browse more products