Sex dates in nederland english online dating chat up lines
The advice in this guideline is not limited to the examples provided and should not be applied rigidly.
For example, some words have specific technical meanings in some contexts and are acceptable in those contexts, e.g. What matters is that articles should be well-written and consistent with the core content policies—Neutral point of view, No original research, and Verifiability.
A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority, yet has no substantial basis.
Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed.
The guideline does not apply to quotations, which should be faithfully reproduced from the original sources; see the section on quotations in the main Manual of Style.
Words to watch: some people say, many scholars state, it is believed/regarded/considered, many are of the opinion, most feel, experts declare, it is often reported, it is widely thought, research has shown, science says, scientists claim, it is often said, Weasel words are words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated.
Equally, editorial irony and damning with faint praise have no place in Wikipedia articles.
Articles including weasel words should ideally be rewritten such that they are supported by reliable sources; alternatively, they may be tagged with the Words such as supposed, apparent, alleged and purported can imply that a given point is inaccurate, although alleged and accused are appropriate when wrongdoing is asserted but undetermined, such as with people awaiting or undergoing a criminal trial; when these are used, ensure that the source of the accusation is clear.
People responsible for "public spending" (the neutral term) can be loaded both ways, as "the tax-and-spend politicians borrowing off the backs of our grandchildren" or "the public servants ensuring crucial investment in our essential infrastructure for the public good".
Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist or sexist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution.