ৱিকিপিডিয়া:ৱিকিপিডিয়া কি নহয়: বিভিন্ন সংশোধনসমূহৰ মাজৰ পাৰ্থক্য

Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference, not an instruction manual, guidebook, or textbook. Wikipedia articles should not read like:

 

# '''Travel guides.''' An article on [[Paris]] should mention landmarks, such as the [[Eiffel Tower]] and the [[Louvre]], but not the telephone number or street address of your favorite hotel, nor the current price of a ''café au lait'' on the [[Champs-Élysées]]. Wikipedia is not the place to recreate content more suited to entries in hotel or culinary guides, travelogues, and the like. Notable locations may meet the inclusion criteria, but the resulting articles need not include every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel or venue, etc. Such details may be welcome at [[Wikitravel]] or [http://travel.wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_Travel Wikia travel] instead.

# '''Video game guides.''' An article about a [[computer game]] or [[video game]] should summarize the main actions the player does to win the game. But avoid lists of gameplay weapons, items, or concepts. Detailed coverage of specific point values, achievements, time-limits, levels, types of enemies, character moves, character weight classes, and so on are also considered inappropriate. A concise summary is appropriate if it is essential to understanding the game or its significance in the industry. See [[WP:VGSCOPE]].

# '''Scientific journals and research papers.''' A Wikipedia article should not be presented on the assumption that the reader is well versed in the topic's field. Introductory language in the [[WP:LEAD|lead]] and initial sections of the article should be written in plain terms and concepts that can be understood by any literate reader of Wikipedia without any knowledge in the given field before advancing to more detailed explanations of the topic. While [[WP:LINK|wikilinks]] should be provided for advanced terms and concepts in that field, articles should be written on the assumption that the reader will not or cannot follow these links, instead attempting to infer their meaning from the text.

# '''Academic language.''' Texts should be written for everyday readers, not for academics. Article titles should reflect [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names)|common usage]], not academic terminology, whenever possible.

 

==={{anchor|CBALL|CRYSTAL|CRYSTALBALL}}ৱিকিপিডিয়া ভৱিষ্যতবাণী কৰা জাদুৰ বল নহয়===

{{policy shortcut|WP:BALL|WP:CBALL|WP:CRYSTAL|WP:FUTURE|WP:NOTCRYSTAL|WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL|WP:SPECULATION}}

 

 

# Individual '''scheduled or expected future events''' should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are '''not definite''' until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include the [[United States presidential election, 2012|2012 U.S. presidential election]] and [[2020 Summer Olympics]]. By comparison, the [[United States presidential election, 2020|2020 U.S. presidential election]] and [[2036 Summer Olympics]] are not appropriate article topics if nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. Avoid predicted sports team line-ups, which are inherently unverifiable and speculative. A schedule of future events may be appropriate if it can be verified. As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient. For example, [[ultimate fate of the universe]] is an acceptable topic.

 

# '''Journalism.'''{{anchor|JOURNALISM}} Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. Wikipedia is not a [[WP:PRIMARY|primary source]]. However, our sister projects [[Wikisource]] and [[Wikinews]] do exactly that, and ''are'' intended to be primary sources. Wikipedia does have many ''encyclopedia articles'' on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be updated with recently [[WP:V|verified]] information.

# '''Who's who.''' {{anchor|NOTWHOSWHO}} Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, [[WP:DUE|in proportion]] to their importance to the overall topic. (See [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]] for more details.)

 

{{seealso|Wikipedia:Notability}}

 

 

# '''Lyrics databases.''' Most song lyrics published after 1922 are protected by copyright, and any quotation of them must be kept to a minimum, and used for the purpose of direct commentary or to illustrate some aspect of the style. For songs in the public domain the article should not consist solely of the lyrics ([[Wikisource]] should be used for such articles instead), but should instead provide information about authorship, date of publication, social impact, and so on. Quotations from an out-of-copyright song should be kept to a reasonable length relative to the rest of the article, and used to facilitate discussion, or to illustrate the style; the full text can be put on [[Wikisource]] and linked to from the article. ''Never link to the lyrics of copyrighted songs unless the site linked to clearly has the right to distribute the work.'' See [[Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources]] for full discussion.

# '''Excessive listing of statistics.''' Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. In cases where this may be necessary, (e.g. [[Nationwide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008]]), consider using tables to enhance the readability of lengthy data lists.

 

Since anyone can edit an article and most changes made are displayed immediately, inappropriate material may appear before it can be removed.

 

However, some articles may include text, images, or links which some people may find objectionable, when these materials are relevant to the content. Discussion of potentially objectionable content should not focus on its offensiveness but on whether it is appropriate to include in a given article. Beyond that, "being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for removal of content.

Nor will Wikipedia remove content because the internal bylaws of some organizations forbid that information to be displayed online. Any rules that forbid members of a given organization, fraternity, or religion to show a name or image do not apply to Wikipedia because Wikipedia is not a member of those organizations.

 

The above policies are about Wikipedia's content. The following policies apply to Wikipedia's governance and processes.

 

{{policy shortcut|WP:DEMOCRACY|WP:NOT#DEM|WP:NOTDEMOCRACY}}

{{seealso|Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion}}

 

 

==={{anchor|BUREAUCRACY}}ৱিকিপিডিয়া কোনো আমোলাতন্ত্ৰ নহয়===

While Wikipedia has many elements of a [[bureaucracy]],<ref name="Jr.Lessig2010">{{cite book|author1=Joseph Michael Reagle, Jr.|author2=Lawrence Lessig|title=Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=ml7SlTq8XvIC&pg=PA90|accessdate=30 June 2011|date=30 September 2010|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=9780262014472|pages=90-91}}</ref> it is not governed by statute: it is not a [[moot court]], and rules are not the purpose of the community. Written rules do not themselves set accepted practice. Rather, they document already existing community consensus regarding what should be accepted and what should be rejected. When [[Wikipedia:Avoid instruction creep|instruction creep]] is found to have occurred, it should be removed.

 

 

A procedural error made in a proposal or request is not grounds for rejecting that proposal or request.

Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals. In addition to avoiding battles in discussions, [[Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point|do not make changes to content or policies just to prove a point]] to someone with whom you disagree.

 

 

 

</ref> Threats are not tolerated and may result in a [[Wikipedia:Banning policy|ban]].