Difference between revisions of "Help:Content validity"
From AquaPedia Case Study Database
(Created page with "It is important that all information provided to an AquaPedia case study is *clear *consise *accurate as possible Most case study sections require that the author maintain a...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{Help | ||
| + | |Help Topic=Using AquaPedia, Editing Articles, Adding New Content | ||
| + | }} | ||
It is important that all information provided to an AquaPedia case study is | It is important that all information provided to an AquaPedia case study is | ||
*clear | *clear | ||
| Line 4: | Line 7: | ||
*accurate as possible | *accurate as possible | ||
| − | Most case study sections require | + | Most case study sections require a neutral or balanced point of view, as any user can edit and improve content. |
| + | Individual ASI articles linked to specific case studies allow individual contributors (authors) to provide qualified statements, researched opinions, and other non-neutral information, insight, or wisdom on a topic. | ||
Cases or Case Sections that do not | Cases or Case Sections that do not | ||
| Line 11: | Line 15: | ||
*appear to be neutrally presented | *appear to be neutrally presented | ||
| − | may be flagged by a | + | may be flagged by a another user as requiring additional fact-checking, edits for clarity/factuality, or other improvements to improve the validity of the content. |
Latest revision as of 15:19, 6 March 2013
It is important that all information provided to an AquaPedia case study is
- clear
- consise
- accurate as possible
Most case study sections require a neutral or balanced point of view, as any user can edit and improve content.
Individual ASI articles linked to specific case studies allow individual contributors (authors) to provide qualified statements, researched opinions, and other non-neutral information, insight, or wisdom on a topic.
Cases or Case Sections that do not
- provide sufficient references
- appear to be neutrally presented
may be flagged by a another user as requiring additional fact-checking, edits for clarity/factuality, or other improvements to improve the validity of the content.
