使用者:Cwek/工作室/關於條目常規的一些備存

Wikipedia_talk:命名常規/存檔13#提議大幅修訂命名常規

en命名常規中關於條目命名中立性的解釋：

“

Neutrality in article titles

Conflicts often arise over whether an article title complies with Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy. Resolving such debates depends on whether the article title is a name derived from reliable sources or a descriptive title created by Wikipedia editors.

Non-neutral but common names

When the subject of an article is referred to mainly by a single common name, as evidenced through usage in a significant majority of English-language sources, Wikipedia generally follows the sources and uses that name as its article title (subject to the other naming criteria). Sometimes that common name includes non-neutral words that Wikipedia normally avoids (e.g. Alexander the Great, or the Teapot Dome scandal). In such cases, the prevalence of the name, or the fact that a given description has effectively become a proper name (and that proper name has become the common name), generally overrides concern that Wikipedia might appear as endorsing one side of an issue. An article title with non-neutral terms cannot simply be a name commonly used in the past; it must be the common name in current use.

Notable circumstances under which Wikipedia often avoids a common name for lacking neutrality include the following:

Trendy slogans and monikers that seem unlikely to be remembered or connected with a particular issue years later
Colloquialisms where far more encyclopedic alternatives are obvious

Article titles and redirects should anticipate what readers will type as a first guess and balance that with what readers expect to be taken to. Thus, typing "Octomom" properly redirects to Nadya Suleman, which is in keeping with point 2, above. Typing "Antennagate" redirects the reader to a particular section of iPhone 4, which is in keeping with points 1 and 2, above. Typing "Great Leap Forward" does not redirect, which is in keeping with the general principle.

Non-judgmental descriptive titles

In some cases a descriptive phrase (such as Restoration of the Everglades) is best as the title. These are often invented specifically for articles, and should reflect a neutral point of view, rather than suggesting any editor's opinions. Avoid judgmental and non-neutral words; for example, allegation or alleged can either imply wrongdoing, or in a non-criminal context may imply a claim "made with little or no proof" and so should be avoided in a descriptive title. (Exception: articles where the topic is an actual accusation of illegality under law, discussed as such by reliable sources even if not yet proven in a court of law. These are appropriately described as "allegations".)

However, non-neutral but common names (see preceding subsection) may be used within a descriptive title. Even descriptive titles should be based on sources, and may therefore incorporate names and terms that are commonly used by sources. (Example: Because "Boston Massacre" is an acceptable title on its own, the descriptive title "Political impact of the Boston Massacre" would also be acceptable.)

”

條目標題的中立性

有時會出現經常條目標題是否符合維基百科中立觀點政策的衝突。解決此類爭論取決於條目標題是來自可靠來源的名稱還是由維基百科編輯們創建的描述性標題。

不中立但常用的標題

當一篇文章的主題主要由一個常用名稱引述時，正如其在絕大多數英語（本地應該「中文」）來源中使用所證明的那樣，維基百科通常會遵循這些來源並使用該名稱作為其條目標題（同時受其他命名標準的約束）。有時，這個常用名稱包括了維基百科通常避免的非中立用詞（例如「偉大的亞歷山大」（Alexander the Great）、「茶壺山醜聞案」（Teapot Dome scandal））。在這種情況下，名稱的普遍性，或者一個給定的描述已經有效地成為一個專有名詞（並且該專有名詞已經成為常用名稱）的事實，通常會壓倒對維基百科可能出現的支持某一方問題的擔憂。帶有非中立詞的文章標題不能簡單地認為在過去是常用的，它應該是現在常用的。

維基百科經常因缺乏中立性而避免使用通用名稱的值得注意的情況包括：

幾年後似乎不太可能被記住或與特定問題相關的時髦口號和綽號
顯然地能被更百科全書式替代的俗話

條目標題和重定向應該預測讀者首先輸入什麼，並與讀者期望的內容進行平衡。所以，輸入「Octomom」能被重定向到「Nadya Suleman」，對應上面的第2點。輸入「Antennagate（天線門）」會被重定向到「iPhone 4」的其中一個章節（天線門事件），對應上面第1、2點。輸入「Great Leap Forward（大躍進）」不應該被重定向，這符合普遍常識。

非批判性的描述性標題

在某些情況下，描述性短語（例如「大沼澤區的恢復（Restoration of the Everglades）」）最適合作為標題，這通常是專門為該條目發明的，應該反映中立的觀點，而不是暗示任何編輯的意見。避免使用批判性和非中立詞語，例如「指控」或「指稱」可能暗示有不法行為；或者在非犯罪語境下，可能暗示「在很少或沒有證據的情況」提出的主張，因此應該避免在描述性標題中使用。（例外：條目主題是法律規定的非法行為的實際指控，即使尚未在法庭上得到證實，但由於可靠來源對此進行討論過，這些能被恰當地描述為「指控」。）

然而，非中立但常用的標題（見前面內容）可以使被用在描述性標題中。即使是描述性標題，也應以資料來源為基礎，因此可以納入資料來源中常用的名稱和術語。（例子：因為「Boston Massacre」是可以接受的標題，所以「茶壺山醜聞案的政治影響（Political impact of the Boston Massacre）」也是可以接受。）

en的中立性中關於條目命名的解釋：

“

In some cases, the name chosen for a topic can give an appearance of bias. Although neutral terms are generally preferable, name choice must be balanced against clarity. Thus, if a name is widely used in reliable sources (particularly those written in English) and is therefore likely to be well recognized by readers, it may be used even though some could regard it as biased. For example, the widely used names "Boston Massacre", "Teapot Dome scandal", and "Jack the Ripper" are legitimate ways of referring to the subjects in question despite appearing to pass judgment. The best name to use for a topic may depend on the context in which it is mentioned. It may be appropriate to mention alternative names and the controversies over their use, particularly when the topic in question is itself the main topic being discussed.

This advice especially applies to article titles. Although multiple terms may be in common usage, a single name should be chosen as the article title, in line with the article titling policy (and relevant guidelines such as on geographical names).

Article titles that combine alternative names are discouraged. For example, names such as "Derry/Londonderry", "Aluminium/Aluminum", and "Flat Earth (Round Earth)" should not be used. Instead, alternative names should be given their due prominence within the article itself, and redirects created as appropriate.

Some article titles are descriptive rather than being an actual name. Descriptive titles should be worded neutrally, so as not to suggest a viewpoint for or against a topic, or to confine the content of the article to views on a particular side of an issue (for example, an article titled "Criticisms of X" might be better renamed "Societal views on X"). Neutral titles encourage multiple viewpoints and responsible article writing.

”

實現中立

命名

在某些情況下，為一個主題選擇的名稱可能給人產生一種偏見的感覺。雖然中立術語通常更可取，但這必須與清晰度相平衡。如果一個名字在可靠來源（尤其是那些用英文（對應的話就是中文）編寫的）中被廣泛使用，很可能被讀者更好地識別出來，即使有些人可能認為它有偏見，但也可以使用它。例如，廣泛使用的名稱「Boston Massacre（波士頓大屠殺，英國稱為「國王街事件」）」、「Teapot Dome scandal（茶壺山醜聞案）」和「Jack the Ripper（開膛手傑克）」都是合規地指代其相關主題，儘管可能看起來是在進行判斷。用於某個主題的最佳名稱可能取決於提及它的上下文；提及替代名稱及其使用的爭議可能是合適的，特別是當前所討論的問題正是正在討論的主題時。儘管可能有多個術語常用，但應根據命名常規（以及其他命名規定）選擇一個名稱作為文章標題。

不鼓勵為了分列觀點而使用組合替代名稱來作為條目標題。例如，不應使用「Derry/Londonderry（德里 (北愛爾蘭)的不同稱呼）」、「Aluminium/Aluminum（鋁的英語不同拼寫）」或「Flat Earth (Round Earth)（地平說與地圓說）」。但同樣，替代名稱應在文章本身中得到應有的重視並酌情創建重定向。

有些條目標題是描述性的，而不僅是其實際名稱。描述性標題的措辭應保持中立，以免暗示支持或反對某個主題的觀點，或將文章的內容限制在某個問題特定方面的觀點（例如，標題為「X 的批評」的條目可能最好改名為「社會對 X 的看法」）。中立的標題鼓勵多種觀點以及負責任的條目寫作。