, meaning it generally doesn't need to be mentioned.
Michael Phelps (born June 30, 1985) is an American former competitive swimmer and the
Kellogg Company as a sponsor and a three-month suspension by USA Swimming. In September 2014, he was arrested again, this time on charges of drunk driving and speeding in Baltimore
, Maryland.
Answer
Not neutral. An article
should not give undue weight to minor aspects
of its subject. While Phelps has indeed encountered legal trouble on several occasions, it would be inappropriate to devote such a large portion of the opening paragraph of this article to those occasions.
Not neutral. Calling something the greatest is an example of
peacock language, in this case expressing an opinion that can't be supported by reliable sources. You should show instead of telling, using verifiable facts; it would be much better to instead write The New York Yankees have won 26 World Series
championships — almost three times as many as any other team.
William Shakespeare is widely considered to be one of the greatest authors in the English language.
Answer
Neutral. This is a proper description of a
reputation
. Crucially, it is only valid because many reliable sources have actually stated that Shakespeare has this reputation. The phrase widely considered is important – while it is a fact that he is considered one of the greatest, it would be an opinion to directly say that he is one of the greatest.
Cats received negative reviews from critics, who criticized the CGI effects, plot, and tone, with many calling it one of the worst films of 2019.
Answer
Neutral. Wikipedia describes reputations, indicating the relative prominence of different viewpoints. When reputations are bad, Wikipedia should say so, without employing
false balance
.
For example, Critic A reviewed Cats positively, praising X, while critic B reviewed Cats negatively, criticizing Y is verifiably true, but still not acceptable as it isn't neutral. Writing that would be
false balance
, as it inaccurately summarizes an overwhelmingly negative critical reception as if it were evenly mixed between positive and negative reviews.
In 2017, Facebook partnered with fact-checkers from the Poynter Institute's International Fact-Checking Network to identify and mark false content, though most advertisements from political candidates are exempt from this program. Critics of the program accused Facebook of not doing enough to remove false information from its website.
Answer
Neutral. This is a good example of how to note that a prominent point of view exists (appropriate) without taking that point of view in Wikipedia's voice (inappropriate). A non-neutral wording might look like this: Facebook is falling short of its duty to fact-check the content on its website, it should do more.
According to
Holocaust was a program of extermination of the Jewish people in Germany, but David Irving
disputes this analysis.
Answer
Not neutral. This phrasing puts these ideas side-by-side, presenting the Holocaust as a matter of opinion rather than historical fact. This is not neutral because David Irving's position of Holocaust denial is a
equal standing
with the consensus among respected historians.
When discussing David Irving, a neutral phrasing might look like this: The
Holocaust denier
, meaning he holds the false belief that the Holocaust did not occur.
Princess Diana died in a Paris hospital in 1997 after being injured in a tragic car crash.
Answer
Not neutral. Even though her death is almost universally considered tragic, putting in the word tragic like this is still an inappropriate instance of
editorializing. Instead, use facts to convey the public response, such as Media attention and public mourning were extensive after her death, and an estimated 2.5billion people watched her televised funeral
Not neutral. The information here is fine, but the characterization of Mao is not. cruel disregard for the lives of his citizens is an opinion and should not be stated as fact.