Wikipedia:唔啱維基百科嘅嘢
出自維基百科，自由嘅百科全書
 |
呢篇文或者呢段要 翻譯（或者由 en:Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not 加料）。請譯佢。 而家譯咗10%，上次編輯：2009年11月14號 20:52。(翻譯指引) |
 |
呢頁解釋英文維基百科嘅一項正式政策；佢被編者廣泛接受，所有用戶都應該遵守。編輯呢頁時，請你肯定你嘅修改都反映共識。有問題，請先到討論頁度傾。呢項政策以英文版嘅原文為準。 |
 |
呢頁啱啱由唔知邊度翻譯過嚟。 希望識得原文同粵語嘅人可以幫手校對，執執文法、用詞、語氣同埋風格，令呢篇文章更加流暢自然，符合原文意思。 需要校對嘅文章(翻譯指引) |
維基百科 係一部網上嘅百科大全，就係咁多。用網上社群形式畀一啲希望有一部高質數百科大全嘅人合作去搞。要合作搞得成呢部百科大全，就需要參與者嘅互相尊重，所以有幾樣嘢喺維基百科係唔啱做嘅。
| 維基百科嘅政策 |
|---|
| 文章嘅標準 |
| 中立嘅觀點 有根有據 非原創研究 唔啱維基百科嘅嘢 講未死嘅人 |
| 同維基友合作 |
| 假定善意 文明嘅編輯方式同禮儀 共識 唔好人身攻擊 處理拗撬 |
|
|
目錄 |
[編輯] 有乜嘢唔啱維基百科？
[編輯] 維基百科唔係一本印好嘅書
維基百科唔係一本印出嚟嘅書，喺呢度完全無限定只可以寫幾多個題目或者只可以開幾多頁，只要合乎編輯要求，任何人都可以加嘢減嘢。
There is a feasible limit for individual article sizes that depends on page download size for our dial-up and microbrowser readers and readability considerations for everybody (see Wikipedia:Article size). After a point, splitting an article into separate articles and leaving adequate summaries is a natural part of growth for a topic (see Wikipedia:Summary style). Some topics are covered by print encyclopedias only in short, static articles, and since Wikipedia requires no paper we can give more thorough treatments, include many more relevant links, be more timely, etc.
This also means you don't have to redirect one topic to a partially equivalent topic that is of more common usage. A "See also" section stating that further information on the topic is available on the page of a closely related topic may be preferable.
[編輯] 維基百科唔係字典
維基百科唔係字典，唔係文法指引，維基百科嘅文唔係：
- 字典：維基百科唔係字典或者辭典，唔好只係去定義一樣嘢，一篇文唔應該單單只係去定義呢樣係乜呢樣係物咁，而係要概括各種資訊令篇文更合乎百科大全嘅準則。除非個字係有文化意義咁都可以勉強接受
- 定義列表：除非係搞清楚頁用嚟闡明返相關嘅文。
- 俗語字典：維基百科唔係用嚟教人點樣用字，唔係用嚟教人點樣講嘢講得有型夠格，除非句嘢本身涉及有唔同意義嘅解釋，咁就可以接受。
維基媒體另設維基詞典，對呢方面有興趣可以去嗰度貢獻嚇。
[編輯] 維基百科唔係用嚟發表原創意念
維基百科唔係畀人發表個人思想同分析，或者發表一啲新穎思想，唔該唔好用維基百科嚟做以下呢啲嘢：
- 原創研究(Primary (original) research)：such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have done primary research on a topic, publish your results in other venues such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, or respected online sites, and Wikipedia will report about your work once it becomes part of accepted knowledge. Not all information added to Wikipedia has to be from peer-reviewed journals, but please strive to make sure that information is reliable and verifiable. For example, citing book, print, or reliable web resources demonstrates that the material is verifiable and is not merely the editor's opinion.
- 獨家發明(Original inventions)：If you invent the word frindle or a new type of dance move, it is not article material until a secondary source reports on it. Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day!
- 個人文學(Personal essays)：that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the consensus of experts). Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge. It is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of human knowledge. In the unusual situation where the opinions of a single individual are important enough to discuss, it is preferable to let other people write about them. Personal essays on topics relating to Wikipedia are welcome in your user namespace or on the Meta-wiki. There is a Wikipedia fork at Wikinfo that encourages personal opinions in articles.
- 時事政論：is a particular case of the previous item. Although current affairs may stir passions and tempt people to "climb soapboxes" (i.e. passionately advocate their pet point of view), Wikipedia is not the medium for this. Articles must be balanced so as to put entries for current affairs in a reasonable perspective. Furthermore, Wikipedia authors should strive to write articles that will not quickly become obsolete.
- 討論區： Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. You can chat with folks about Wikipedia-related topics on their user talk pages, and should resolve problems with articles on the relevant talk pages, but please do not take discussion into articles. Also, bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article. There are a number of early-stage projects that attempt to use a wiki for discussion and debate.
- 新聞報告：Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. Wikipedia is not a primary source. However, our sister project Wikinews does exactly that, and is intended to be a primary source. Wikipedia does have many encyclopedia articles on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be updated with recent verified information.
[編輯] 維基百科唔係用嚟畀人發高見
維基百科唔係用嚟畀人大發高見、唔係用嚟爭論、傳教或者賣廣告。所以，喺維基百科嘅文入面唔應該有以下啲嘢：
- 宣道(Propaganda), 傳教(advocacy)或招聘(recruitment)：呢度係講任何形式嘅嘢，包括商業上、政治上、宗教或者任何嘢，啲文係應該客觀咁去講呢啲嘢，無論點都要喺中立觀點原則之下去寫，而宣道呀、傳教呀、請人呀咁，呢啲嘢呢，最好自己開返個 Blog，或者去合適嘅新聞組度搞啦。
- 發表評論：雖然一啲社會事件或者政治事件，會激起好多人有唔同諗法，相關嘅文好容變成畀人用嚟大發高見，但維基百科並唔係咁樣用，如果係涉及緊一啲時事觀點，最好可以平衡返各種唔同觀點，儘量交代返唔同人嘅睇法，令篇文合乎返中立觀點原則。
- 個人宣傳：你當然可以寫關於你自己或者你做緊嘅嘢，但要留意確保寫嘅嘢係合乎百科大全標準，同其他所有文嘅準則都一樣，至小都要有根據同中立觀點呢啲原則。
- 賣廣告：如果篇文係同一間公司、產品有關，你寫嘅嘢一定要合乎中立觀點政策，即係話，至少要有第三者媒介嘅資料做根據，而一啲濕碎或者一啲唔多人識無乜代表性嘅公司仔都唔太啱寫。而一啲商業機構嘅連結最好係啲有代表性嘅公司，同埋要同篇文嘅內容有關。記住記住記住，維基百科唔係用嚟支援任何生意或者扶持一啲新公司或者計劃，請參考值得注意或有顯著成就嘅公司或者組織睇嚇乜嘢公司係值得寫。
[編輯] 維基百科唔係用嚟擺網上連結、圖、相、多媒體擋案
維基百科既唔係圖片、連接或者媒體文檔嘅鏡像亦唔係集合。所有加在維基百科中嘅資料都可能要狠狠咁修改一番。當你提交任何內容嘅時候，你同意在GNU FDL嘅標準下免費咁發布。[1] 維基百科嘅文章唔可以:
- 只有外部連接嘅收集或者網絡目錄。在文章中加一兩條有用嘅外部連接冇錯；但係，過多嘅列表會整差篇文章同維基嘅聲譽。你可以去Wikipedia:外部連接度睇下指導.
- 只有內部連接嘅收集， 除咗搞清楚唔明確嘅頁面，同埋整列表嚟集合同一類嘅文章.
- 只有免費公眾文檔同埋其他原材料嘅收集。例如成本書或者源代碼，原始嘅歷史文獻，信，法律條文，宣言，同埋其他只係喺未經修改，用原措辭發布時先至有用嘅原材料。如果想完整噉復制第一手資訊可以去Wikisource，但係唔係喺維基百科。用下啲免費公共資源例如1911 Encyclopædia Britannica加入啲文章度係冇錯嘅。參考Wikipedia:唔好喺文章度加入原始信息同維基共享資源嘅內容政策。
- 只有圖片或媒體文件嘅收集而無任何文字解釋。如果你對展示圖片感興趣，唔該同時提供一篇百科全書式嘅文章，或者考慮將圖片加入Wikimedia Commons。如果一幅圖片係來自網上嘅免費資源，噉就考慮將圖片加入Wikipedia:冇文章嘅圖片或者Wikipedia:公共免費圖片資源。
[編輯] 維基百科唔係網誌或者任何乜嘢網頁寄存服務
粵語版本：
原本英文版本：
- Wikipedia is not MySpace. You may not host your own website, blog, or wiki at Wikipedia. Wikipedia pages are not:
- Personal web pages. Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet. The focus of user pages should not be social networking, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration.
- File storage areas. Please upload only files that are used (or will be used) in encyclopedia articles or project pages; anything else will be deleted. If you have extra relevant images, consider uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons, where they can be linked from Wikipedia.
- Dating services. Wikipedia is not an appropriate place to advertise your desire for relationships or sex. User pages which move beyond broad expressions of sexual preference are unacceptable. This is particularly true for practices which are illegal or unpopular with the general public such as sex with animals or minors.
If you are interested in using the wiki technology for a collaborative effort on something else, even if it is just a single page, there are many sites that provide wiki hosting (free or for money). You can also install wiki software on your server. See the Wiki Science wikibook for information on doing this. Scratchpad Wiki Labs also allows personal wikis.
[編輯] 維基百科唔係乜嘢料都收一餐
作為百科大全，維基百科唔係一啲分寸都無咁乜都可以寫，有啲嘢就算百份百無錯，但都唔等如可以放喺維基百科入面。當然有啲題材係咪應該放入百科大全仲有得拗，但係有幾樣公認嘅準則已經肯定唔啱維基百科，例如：
- 百問百答 ( Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ)). 維基百科唔係百問百答、十萬個為甚麼之類嘅嘢，唔係用嚟為一啲問題提供答案，不過你可以改返成一篇文，放返喺適合嘅題目入面。
- 旅遊指南：講一個地方嘅文你可以講嚇個地方有乜景點，有乜嘢好玩特式，無問題，但係就唔好走去推介邊間酒店好住，邊度啲咖啡又平又靚，連酒店電話都畀埋人，呢啲就真係唔應該喺維基百科度寫。
- 記念冊：有朋友或者親人過身或者去咗第二度係幾令人傷感，但就唔好因為咁而開篇文走去紀念，寫關於人嘅嘢，請參考返人物重要性同埋講未死嘅人準則，唔係乜嘢人死咗都開篇文去紀念。
- 說明書 While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instructions, advice (legal, medical, or otherwise) or suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes. Note that this does not apply to the Wikipedia: namespace, where "how-to"s relevant to editing Wikipedia itself are appropriate, such as Wikipedia:How to draw a diagram with Dia. If you're interested in a how-to style manual, you may want to look at our sister project Wikibooks.
- 網絡地圖 Wikipedia articles should not exist only to describe the nature, appearance or services a website offers, but should describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance, which can be significantly more up-to-date than most reference sources since we can incorporate new developments and facts as they are made known. See current events for examples.
- 教科書 Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference, not a textbook. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to teach subject matter. It is not appropriate to create or edit articles which read as textbooks, with leading questions and step-by-step problem solutions as examples. These belong on our sister projects Wikibooks and Wikisource
- Plot summaries. Wikipedia articles on published works should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot. A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic. See Wikipedia:Notability (fiction).
- 歌詞庫 Most song lyrics are protected by copyright. Exceptions include traditional songs whose lyrics are in the public domain. However, even in this case the article may not consist solely of the lyrics, but has to primarily contain information about authorship, date of publication, social impact, etc. Source text generally belongs on WikiSource.
- 資料庫 Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readibility and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. Articles which are primarily comprised of statistical data may be better suited for inclusion in Wikisource as freely available reference material for the construction of related encyclopedic articles on that topic. Infoboxes or tables should also be considered to enhance the readability of lengthy data lists.
- 新聞報導 Wikipedia properly considers the long-term historical notability of persons and events, keeping in mind the harm our work might cause. The fact that someone or something has been in the news for a brief period of time does not automatically justify an encyclopedia article. While Wikipedia strives to be comprehensive, the policies on biographies of living persons and neutral point of view should lead us to appropriately contextualize events. The briefer the appearance of a subject in the news, the lower the likelihood of creating an acceptably comprehensive encyclopedic biography. In order to help keep articles concise, efficient, and on-topic (and to help reduce privacy concerns), editors are invited to consider whether, in a particular article, the names of specific individuals could be redacted without the loss of non-trivial information or necessary clarity. Even when news events themselves merit an encyclopedia article of their own, additional biographies of person(s) involved may not be necessary, for instance, where they largely duplicate relevant information. Additionally, extant articles should not carry daily reports of things such as game summaries of sporting events or musical performances by a band or group unless the events themselves are noteworthy. Timely news articles, however, are welcome on our sister project Wikinews.
[編輯] 維基百科唔係算命師傅
維基百科唔係collection of unverifiable speculation.全部條目about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, provided that discussion is properly referenced. It is not appropriate for an editor to insert their own opinions or analysis. Forward-looking articles about unreleased products (例如電影、遊戲等等) require special care to make sure that they are not advertising. In particular:
- Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event isn't already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include 2008 U.S. presidential election, and 2012 Summer Olympics. By comparison, the 2016 U.S. presidential election and 2036 Summer Olympics are not considered appropriate article topics because nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. A schedule of future events may also be appropriate.
- Similarly, individual items from a predetermined list or a systematic pattern of names, preassigned to future events or discoveries, are not suitable article topics, if only generic information is known about the item. Lists of tropical cyclone names is encyclopedic; "Tropical Storm Alex (2010)" is not, even though it is virtually certain that a storm of that name will occur in the North Atlantic and will turn counterclockwise. Similarly, articles about words formed on a predictable numeric system (such as "septenquinquagintillion") are not encyclopedic unless they are defined on good authority, or genuinely in use. Certain scientific extrapolations, such as chemical elements documented by IUPAC, prior to isolation in the laboratory, are usually considered encyclopedic.
- Articles that present extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are original research and therefore inappropriate. Of course, we do and should have articles about notable artistic works, essays, or credible research that embody predictions. An article on Star Trek is appropriate; an article on "Weapons to be used in World War III" is not. "Future history" is welcome at Future Wikia, where original research is allowed to some extent and fact-based speculations are welcome.
[編輯] 維基百科唔會有審查
Template:Seealso 維基百科may contain content that一些讀者consider objectionable or offensive.每個閱讀維基百科嘅人都可以編輯每一篇文and the changes are displayed instantaneously without any checking to ensure appropriateness, so Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images are tasteful to all users or adhere to specific social or religious norms or requirements. While obviously inappropriate content (such as an irrelevant link to a shock site) is usually removed immediately, or content that is judged to violate Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy can be removed, some articles may include objectionable text, images, or links if they are relevant to the content (such as the article about pornography) and do not violate any of our existing policies (especially 中立嘅觀點),或者美國 of Florida嘅法律,即係維基百科嘅伺服器所在地。
[編輯] 乜嘢唔啱維基百科社群？
以下係講喺維基百科入面討論時要留心嘅嘢
[編輯] 維基百科唔係用嚟鬥氣
維基百科唔係一個畀你鬥氣嘅地方，import personal conflicts, or nurture hatred or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals.
每個用戶is expected to interact with其他 civilly, calmly, and in a spirit of cooperation。唔好 insult, harass, or intimidate those with whom you have a disagreement. Rather, approach the matter intelligently and engage in polite discussion. If a user acts uncivilly, uncalmly, uncooperatively, insultingly, harassingly, or intimidatingly toward you, this does not give you an excuse to do the same in retaliation. Either respond solely to the factual points brought forward and ignore its objectionable flavoring, or ignore the relevant message entirely. You could also remind the user in question of Wikipedia's policy of no personal attacks in such a situation. Wikipedia is not an anti-leech community. Users should not criticize others on not devoting time to edit.
當一個conflict continues to bother you or others, adhere to the procedures of dispute resolution. There are always users willing to mediate and arbitrate disputes between others.
Also, do not create or modify articles just to prove a point. Do not use Wikipedia to make legal or other threats against Wikipedia, Wikipedians, or the Wikimedia Foundation: other means already exist to communicate legal problems.[2] Threats are not tolerated and may result in a ban.
[編輯] 維基百科唔係無王管
Wikipedia is free and open, but restricts both freedom and openness where they interfere with creating an encyclopedia. Accordingly, Wikipedia is not a forum for unregulated free speech. The fact that Wikipedia is an open, self-governing project does not mean that any part of its purpose is to explore the viability of anarchic communities. Our purpose is to build an encyclopedia, not to test the limits of anarchism. See also meta:Power structure.
[編輯] 維基百科唔係民主試驗場
維基百科唔係一個民主實驗或者任何政治體系。而係由共識嚟作出決定，而共識係通過討論，而唔係投票而嚟，不過有時亦會通過投票(straw polls)去達成共識，但任何投票或者問卷調查實際上都係有導向性，所以要做得好審慎。總括嚟講，任何嘢都有得傾，無話實唔畀嘅(not be treated as binding)
[編輯] 維基百科唔玩官僚
維基百科唔係模擬法庭，而規定唔係建立維基嘅目的。要避免過多使用規章條文。 A perceived procedural error made in posting anything, such as an idea or nomination, is not grounds for invalidating that post. Follow the spirit, not the letter, of any rules, policies and guidelines if you feel they conflict. Disagreements should be resolved through consensus-based discussion, rather than through tightly sticking to rules and procedures.
[編輯] 咁乜先畀做呀？
或者有人會話：呢樣又唔畀嗰樣又唔畀，唓~~仲有乜鬼嘢寫呀！不過先問吓自己，讀者用百科大全嗰陣，到底係想睇到啲乜嘢？乜嘢文啱乜嘢唔啱雖然唔係一個官方政策，但可以作為先例參考，睇嚇乜嘢先算係屬於百科大全嘅內容。
如果你發覺寫咗嘅嘢啱啱就係上面所講唔啱維基百科嘅嘢，你可以試吓咁解決：
- 成篇文改寫
- 將嗰頁改為轉跳頁，咁可以保留返編輯記錄
- 如果合乎刪除原則，咁可以要求將篇文刪除，喺篇文度加{{刪|即刻刪除嘅原因}}呢句嘢就得，不過最好先喺篇文嘅討論頁度講返，了解嚇乜嘢文會剷乜嘢文唔剷，合乎刪除原則先提出刪除都未遲。
- 規矩係死人係生，你直情可以傾嚇係咪可以改規矩，去Wikipedia:唔啱維基百科嘅嘢討論頁度提出你嘅諗法，只要你提出嘅意見係合理，乜都可以有商有量。
[編輯] 用戶頁有乜唔畀
有啲政策係針對用戶頁而設，你個用戶頁並唔係你私人網頁或者網誌，但重點係呢頁唔係畀咗你，呢頁係維基百科一部份，係用嚟協助你做維基百科嘅嘢，唔係用嚟做私人宣傳，詳細請睇：User page help
[編輯] 參考
- ↑ 唔該注意維基百科英文組合咗好多考慮過「公平使用」圖像同文字。（其他文嘅維基百科通常 唔噉做。）參照Wikipedia:版權.
- ↑ If you believe that your legal rights are being violated, you may discuss this with other users involved, take the matter to the appropriate mailing list, contact the Wikimedia Foundation, or in cases of copyright violations notify us at Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation.
[編輯] 類似嘅姊妹計劃
- Wikibooks:What is Wikibooks
- Wikinews:What Wikinews is not
- Wikisource:What is Wikisource?
- Wiktionary:What Wiktionary is not
- Wikiquote:What Wikiquote is not
- Wikiversity:What Wikiversity is not
