Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests/Noticeboards Information

You may want to read the list of frequently asked questions before making a request; in some cases, you may find the answer you're looking for by reading that.

1. State the article being discussed. For example, [[article name]].
2. Either give a link with diffs to the specific change being proposed or use blockquotes (<blockquote> text </blockquote>) to display the text here.
3. Concisely state the problem perceived with the text in question.
4. Before you post to this page, you should already have tried to resolve the dispute on the article's talk page. Give a link here to that discussion, and the final answer to your question will be posted there where other users can read the result.

Editors can post questions here about whether the article content is compliant with the Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy, and editors interested in neutrality issues will give their opinion. If you are satisfied with a response, please tag your thread at the top with {{ resolved}}.

For general questions about the NPOV policy, please go to the Neutral Point of View talk page.

Guidance on how to make articles conform to Wikipedia's neutrality policy can be found on pages listed in Category:Wikipedia neutral point of view, primarily the policy pages Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ. For a list of articles that have been marked as potentially containing a NPOV problem, see Category:NPOV disputes

If your question is about whether material constitutes original research, please use the No original research noticeboard. For review of whether a source is reliable, go to the Reliable sources noticeboard.

See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias if this would be a better venue for the issues you're trying to address.

1. A full citation of the source in question. For example Strickland, D.S. and Worth, B.S. (1980) "Books for the children" Early Childhood Education Journal 8 (2): 58--60.
2. A link to the source in question. For example [http://www.webpage.com]
3. The article in which it is being used. For example [[article name]]
4. The exact statement in the article that the source is supporting. For example <blockquote>text</blockquote>. Many sources are reliable for statement "X" but unreliable for statement "Y".
5. Links to relevant talk page discussion. See diffs for an explanation.

The guideline that most directly relates to whether a given source is reliable is Identifying reliable sources. The policy that most directly relates is: Verifiability. For questions about the sourcing policy, please go to the Verifiability talk page. If your question is about whether material constitutes original research, please use the No original research notice board. If your question is about undue weight, or other neutral point of view issues please use the NPOV noticeboard.

• Editors may ask for advice about material that might be original research or original synthesis.
• If the content in question includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position, it may not be published on Wikipedia.
• If you're not sure whether the content is considered original research, please post here so other users may take a look at it.

When starting a discussion:

• Please link to the relevant article(s).
• If you mention specific editors, please inform them of the thread.
• Familiarize yourself with the no original research policy before reporting issues here.

• Editors may seek advice on whether or not a particular topic is fringe or mainstream (especially outside of the fields of science and pseudoscience).
• Questions related to articles on fringe theories may be answered here.
• Report instances where undue weight is being given to fringe theories.
• If your question is whether material constitutes original research or original synthesis, please use the no original research noticeboard.

When starting a discussion:

• Make your comments as concise as possible. Other editors and administrators are less likely to pay attention to long messages.
• Familiarize yourself with the fringe theories guideline before reporting issues here.
• Note that the purpose of this board is not to remove any mention of fringe theories, but rather to ensure that proper balance is maintained.
• Discussion of fringe theories will depend entirely on their notability and reliable coverage in popular media. Above all, fringe theories should never be presented as "fact."

• Obvious cases of corporate vanity can be tagged with {{ db-spam}}.
• Commercial usernames may be reported to the usernames for administrator attention noticeboard.
• Issues involving the biographies of living persons policy may be more suited to the biographies of living persons noticeboard.
• Request help with users that are affected by the conflict of interest guideline. Editors may not use Wikipedia to promote their own interests at the expense of neutrality.
• Ask for advice or get help with proposed article changes if you are affected by a conflict of interest. Propose changes at the article talk page, and then leave a message here if more neutral editors are needed to establish consensus.

Please note that the conflict of interest guideline does not absolutely prohibit subject-matter experts or other people with a connection to a subject from editing articles on that subject. Editors who have a connection to the subject fully comply with the conflicts of interest guideline when they discuss proposed changes on a talk page or make non-controversial edits in mainspace consistent with other Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Furthermore, accusing another editor of having a conflict of interest in order to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited and may result in sanctions against you.

• This noticeboard is for reporting and discussing issues with biographies of living persons. These may include editing disputes and cases where contributors are repeatedly adding troublesome material over an extended period.
• It is not for simple vandalism or material which can easily be removed without argument. If you can, simply remove the offending material.
• For general content disputes regarding biographical articles consider using Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies.
• All Wikipedia editors are encouraged to assist fellow editors regarding the reports below. Administrators taking actions they consider to be " special enforcement" may wish to note this in the enforcement log.

When reporting:

• Make your comments as concise as possible. Other editors and administrators are less likely to pay attention to long messages.
• Familiarize yourself with the biographies of living persons policy before reporting issues here.
• Note that edits by the subject of an article may be welcome in some cases.
• Important: Do not copy and paste any defamatory or libelous information to this noticeboard. Please link to a diff showing the dispute, but do not paste the information here.