Talk:Africa Growth Pilot/Live Tutorials on Core Policies/Module3

We want your feedback: The third module is about the Neutral Point of View as the first core policy for contributing to Wikipedia. Leave us a comment about the general conception of this course outline and the core concepts to be taught. We will do our best to respond or incorporate your feedback into the course outline.

---

Good topic

An often misunderstood concept, worth explaining. · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 09:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for validating this, @Pbsouthwood! Asaf (WMF) (talk) 15:44, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Useful but..

This topic is quite useful but I would suggest adding examples. Examples of well written NPOV articles. I believe this would be a good guideline. Tochiprecious (talk) 16:37, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @Tochiprecious. Yes, of course, the actual module (this is just an outline) would feature plenty of examples, both positive and negative, both at the sentence and paragraph level, and will also give opportunities for exercises, for learners to ensure they have understood the concept and can apply it with confidence. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 15:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Great! Tochiprecious (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

The low bar of promotional language

It doesn't have to be "the freshest up-and-coming DJ in Yantai" or "poised to disrupt the entire sector with offerings for savvy customers" to be promotional language. Even something as inoffensive as "chose to follow her dreams" or "attracted record numbers" are not appropriate encyclopaedic tone. People often get confused between blatant advertising and mere promotion, which are equally disallowed but acted on differently. The ideal is being entirely unable to guess an editor's opinion on a topic based on their prose. Folly Mox (talk) 02:03, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, @Folly Mox. We aim to teach NPOV, not just avoiding "peacock" phrases. "Chose to follow her dreams" is a good example of unencyclopedic language, and we will feature similar examples that are standard in journalistic or magazine discourse, but are inappropriate in the very specific genre that is encyclopedic writing. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 15:46, 5 July 2023 (UTC)