Talk:Onimai/FAQ: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 18:41, 27 February 2024

Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page Onimai. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please update this material when needed.

Q1: Why is Anime News Network cited in the article?

A1: Multiple discussions have deemed the site to be generally reliable with some caveats regarding their encyclopedia and "interest" pieces, which do not meet the same editorial standards (see WP:ANIME discussions 1 2 3 4 and RS/N discussions 1 2). As such they are listed under reliable sources at WP:ANIME/RS#Situational and used in many relevant articles. If you have any concerns about their reliability, this judgment can be challenged at the appropriate venues (i.e. WT:ANIME or WP:RS/N).

Q2: All the reviews cited in the reception section are trashing the anime and that's clearly expressing a bias!

A2: While the reviews from English-language reliable sources have often leaned negative, the goal of NPOV on Wikipedia is to detail all notable opinions, regardless of their critical nature or lack thereof, without being unbalanced or inserting editorial bias. However, there may be perspectives from reliable sources in other languages missing from the article's coverage.

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 |show=yes
 |index=1
-|q=Why are ''[[Anime News Network]]''{{'}}s cited in the article? They're biased and an unreliable blog!
+|q=Why is ''[[Anime News Network]]'' cited in the article?
 |a=Multiple discussions have deemed the site to be generally reliable with some caveats regarding their encyclopedia and "interest" pieces, which do not meet the same editorial standards (see [[WP:ANIME]] discussions [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 28#Anime News Network|1]] [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 36#Citing the ANN encyclopedia|2]] [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 43#ANN rankings|3]] [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 46#Changes at ANN|4]] and RS/N discussions [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 84#Anime|1]] [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 104#ANN's encyclopedia as reliable source for properly tag genre usage|2]]). As such they are listed under reliable sources at [[WP:ANIME/RS#Situational]] and used in many relevant articles. If you have any concerns about their reliability, this judgment can be challenged at the appropriate venues (i.e. [[WT:ANIME]] or [[WP:RS/N]]).
 }}
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 |index=2
 |q=All the reviews cited in the reception section are trashing the anime and that's clearly expressing a bias!
-|a=At the time of writing this, all significant perspectives on ''Onimai'' from English-language reliable sources have been included. Reviews of the show from such sources have generally leaned negative, although individual writers within ANN have expressed differing opinions (some of them more or less positive than others). The goal of NPOV on Wikipedia is not to remove or erase any opinion that anyone has ever had about a topic, but to [[WP:ASSERT|detail those notable opinions neutrally]] without inserting editorial bias. While perspectives from reliable sources in other languages may exist and may differ from that consensus, they are (as of February 2022) not as yet included (though [[WP:WORLDVIEW|ideally should be]]).
+|a=While the reviews from English-language reliable sources have often leaned negative, the goal of NPOV on Wikipedia is to [[WP:ASSERT|detail all notable opinions]], regardless of their critical nature or lack thereof, without being unbalanced or inserting editorial bias. However, there may be perspectives from reliable sources in other languages missing from the article's coverage.
 }}