Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not RationalWiki
This is an essay.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
|This page in a nutshell: We are here to build an encyclopedia, not refute pseudoscience.|
Wikipedia is not RationalWiki.
RationalWiki differs in several ways from the philosophy of Wikipedia and some other informational wikis. It is written from a self-described "snarky point of view" and "scientific point of view" (both abbreviated as SPOV) rather than a "neutral point of view" (NPOV), and publishes opinion, speculation, and original research. We, on the other hand, are primarily concerned with building an encyclopedia and not with disproving pseudoscience, the paranormal, alternative medicine, urban legends, religion, or anything else for that matter. Even with good intentions, the latter can sometimes run contrary to the former.
What pseudoscience is (according to policy)
Wikipedia fortunately has its own answer to the demarcation problem. Pseudoscience is
nonsense claiming to be scientific, or
theories which, while purporting to be scientific, are obviously bogus, or theories
presented by proponents as science but characteristically fail to adhere to scientific standards and methods. Pseudoscience is not a synonym for false, or even for unscientific.
- Wikipedia:Systemic bias
There is a vast body of critical and decolonial scholarship that offers much broader perspectives than those that are presently available on Wikipedia. These peer-reviewed studies provide reliable sources that are relatively easy to incorporate into the encyclopedia and have enormous potential for countering systemic bias.
- Wikipedia:NPOV means neutral editing, not neutral content
While mainstream subjects are based on numerous excellent sources and tend to receive favorable treatment here, there are editors whose legitimate skepticism towards fringe subjects tends to make them deal improperly with the subjects, even to the point of censoring and deleting them.
- User:Guy Macon/Yes. We are biased.
- Wikipedia:Why Santa Is Important
- Thinking that Wikipedia is RationalWiki is only one step away from comparing stories about Santa Claus to holocaust denial.
- ^ RationalWiki's stated goals are to
analyze and refute pseudoscience and the anti-science movement, document 'crank' ideas, explore conspiracy theories, authoritarianism, and fundamentalism, and analyze how these subjects are handled in the media.
- ^ From the RationalWiki article. See also "RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article?". RationalWiki. Archived from the original on February 9, 2015. Retrieved January 16, 2015.
- ^ WP:FRINGE/PS
- ^ Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience#Obvious pseudoscience
- ^ WP:PSCI
- ^ "Science and Pseudo-Science (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)". plato.stanford.edu. Retrieved 4 February 2023.
All non-science is not pseudoscience, and science has non-trivial borders to other non-scientific phenomena, such as metaphysics, religion, and various types of non-scientific systematized knowledge.
- ^ From WP:SANTA:
Some people believe the Holocaust never happened (and even offer “proof”)is offered as to why
telling the truth about Santa is important.