LPedia:Disputed or Controversial Material

LPedia strives to be both neutral and comprehensive. However, there are some subjects about which there is current or former controversy, and both the fact of the controversy and the arguments of the various sides are themselves part of the LP's history. The following general principles apply to posting and organizing of material on such subjects:

• The focus of the main article on a topic should be on undisputed facts.
• To the extent that there is or was actual controversy about something that would otherwise belong in the main article, that fact may be mentioned in the main article along with a brief summary of the nature of the disagreement, but this information should be placed in a way that does not distract from the more basic and undisputed material.
• In the case of ideological disputes, if the LP already has a formal position on the subject (e.g., in the Platform), primary reference should be to that position (with a link to an appropriate document if available) and any opinions contrary to that position identified as such.
• Statements of personal opinion or the arguments of factions can often be found in other documents where their source or authorship is clear (e.g., newsletter articles, blogs, reports), and links or other references to those documents are a good way to make such opinions available.
• If such documents are not already available on LPedia, copies may be uploaded as articles in the Document namespace, with appropriate titles that allow a reader to understand the source.
• If the controversy relates to information about a person that might be seen as damaging, please refer to the style manual section on Handling of Potentially Damaging Information for additional guidance.
• If a dispute is significant enough that more than a brief summary is necessary to allow a reader to understand its nature or to provide links to all the relevant source material, a separate article should be created with a title like "xxx Controversy", and a link to that article included in the main article. Even within such an article, however, authors and editors should try to avoid "taking sides"; they should present information that allows the reader to understand the contrasting viewpoints, and refrain from use of language that indicates a bias (e.g., praise of one side, or "slurs" against another).
• LPedia is not designed to host ongoing debates, and should not be used as a substitute for social media discussion groups, e-mail lists, or other channels that are set up for that purpose. Even in the case of articles about disputes, material should be organized by topic, not as a back-and-forth discussion.
• Articles that are inconsistent with these guidelines may be subject to reorganization by an editor or admin.

The following notice may be placed as a reminder of the these policies, either by the author or an admin, in any article where it seems likely that they will apply, by making use of the "Disputed" template:

Disputed/Controversial Material This page (Disputed or Controversial Material) may contain disputed or controversial material because there are strong and differing opinions on some aspect of this topic. LPedia is an archive and takes no sides. The main article on a topic should focus on undisputed facts. Material that represents subjective opinions should be presented as such by one of the following methods: reference to another document that has a clearly identified author or source, a footnote that identifies the source along with the opinion, a brief summary in the main text of the nature of the dispute and the positions of each side. Authors should refrain from language that shows bias, e.g., praise of one side or slurs against another. Extended presentations of a particular viewpoint are best provided as separate documents or articles labeled as such; this allows readers to make their own judgments and arrive at their own conclusions. Thank you for respecting the purpose of LPedia. For more information see LPedia:Disputed or Controversial Material.