ৱিকিপিডিয়া:ৱিকিপিডিয়া কি নহয়: বিভিন্ন সংশোধনসমূহৰ মাজৰ পাৰ্থক্য

Wikipedia is not a collection of [[ৱিকিপিডিয়া:বিশ্বাসযোগ্যতা|অপ্ৰমাণিত]] speculation. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It ''is'' appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced. It is ''not'' appropriate for editors to insert [[ৱিকিপিডিয়া:মৌলিক গৱেষণাৰহিত লেখা|নিজা মতামত আৰু বিশ্লেষণ]]. Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating [[WP:UNDUE|undue bias]] to any specific point-of-view. In forward-looking articles about unreleased products, such as films and games, take special care to avoid [[Wikipedia:Spam|advertising]] and unverified claims (for films, see [[WP:NFF]]). In particular:

-->

 

# 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.

# Individual items from a '''predetermined list or a systematic pattern of names,''' pre-assigned to future events or discoveries, are not suitable article topics, if only generic information is known about the item. [[Lists of tropical cyclone names]] is encyclopedic; "Tropical Storm Alberto (2012)" is not, even though it is virtually certain that a storm of that name will occur in the North Atlantic and will turn counterclockwise. Similarly, articles about '''words formed on a predictable numeric system''' (such as "septenquinquagintillion") are not encyclopedic unless they are defined on good authority, or genuinely in use. Certain scientific extrapolations are considered to be encyclopedic, such as chemical elements documented by [[International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry|IUPAC]] before isolation in the laboratory.

# Articles that present original research in the form of '''extrapolation, speculation, and "future history"''' are inappropriate. While scientific and cultural norms continually evolve, we must wait for this evolution to happen, rather than try to predict it. Of course, we do and should have articles ''about'' '''notable''' ''artistic works, essays, or credible research'' that embody predictions. An article on ''[[List of weapons in Star Trek|Weapons of Star Trek]]'' is appropriate; an article on "Weapons to be used in World War III" is not.