사용자:Pectus Solentis/작업실/위키백과:위키백과에 당신을 소개하는 문서가 있다는 건 자랑스러운 일이 아닙니다

위키백과에 당신 스스로를 소개하는 문서를 쓰실 생각이신가요? 그렇게 하시기 전에, 위키백과의 정책과 지침을 마음 속 깊이 새겨보시는 시간을 가져 보시기 바랍니다. 특히 위키백과의 3가지 대원칙 중 하나인, 백:중립을 말이죠.

위키백과는 중립적인 관점을 추구합니다. 당신 자신에 대해서 쓰여진 관점은 그 누구의 관점에도 편중되어 있지 않아야 합니다. 위키백과의 그 어떤 문서라도 검증될 수 있고 신뢰할 수 있는 출처에서 언급된 증거에 기반해서, 좋은 점과 나쁜 점을 모두 수록해야만 합니다. 위키백과에 당신 자신에 대한 문서가 등재된다면, 그 문서는 절대로 당신에게 좋은 말만 하기 위해서 존재하는 게 아닙니다. 단지 당신 스스로에 대해서 제3자 입장에서 확인 가능한 정보를 수록할 뿐입니다.

이것은 당신에게 있어서 축복이기도 하면서 동시에 저주이기도 합니다.

좋은 일이든 나쁜 일이든 누군가가 직접 이뤄낸 성취나 사건은 그 사람에게 위키백과에 수록될만한 저명성을 안겨줄 수 있습니다. 그렇게 공인(公人)이 되면 그 사람의 개인적인 삶 역시 공중에 공개됩니다. 이 세상 그 누구도 완벽할 수 없기 때문에, 그 사람의 실수 역시도 널리 퍼질 수, 어쩌면 과장되어서 퍼질 수 있고, 결국엔 위키백과에 실릴 수 있을만큼 저명해질 수도 있습니다. 비록 당신이 하늘을 우러러 한 점 부끄럼 없이 살아왔다고 해도, 그리고 당신 자신에 대해서 위키백과에 쓰여 있는 내용이 사람들의 이목을 끌지 못할만큼 평범하다고 해도, 언젠가는 당신의 생애 첫 실수가 위키백과에 오를 수 있습니다. 한 순간에 당신의 명성은 만천하에 기록된 악명으로 바뀌는 것입니다. 그렇습니다. 위키백과는 수많은 사람들이 읽고 있습니다! 위키백과에 수록된 내용은 정말 널리널리 퍼져나갈 것입니다.

배경 편집

 
Do you really want to suddenly get more attention?

위키백과에 당신을 소개하는 문서가 있다는 건 자랑스러운 일이 아닙니다. 백:중립 규정에 의해, 당신에 대해서 좋은 사실이든 나쁜 사실이든 가림없이 수록되어야 합니다. 당신에게 불리한 내용이라고 무작정 들어내서도 안 되며, 위키백과:이해관계의 충돌 지침에 의해서 당신을 소개하는 문서에 수록된 당신에 대한 안 좋은 사실을 당신 스스로 드러낼 권리도 제한됩니다. There are serious consequences of ignoring these, and the "Law of Unintended Consequences" works on Wikipedia. If your faults are minor and relatively innocent, then you have nothing to fear, but coveting "your" own article isn't something to seek, because it won't be your "own" at all. Once it's in Wikipedia, it is viewed by the world and cannot be recalled.

For example, Tiger Woods is one of the most accomplished golfers, yet his possible fall from grace is mentioned in his article.[1] Michael Phelps holds the record for the most gold medals in Olympic history, but his drunk driving arrest in 2004 and a bong photo published in 2009 are both mentioned on Wikipedia, not violating Wikipedia's BLP guidelines.

Charles Manson is notorious for being a murderer. Nidal Malik Hasan became notable as a result of the Fort Hood shooting, but his life prior to this incident was not notable.

Elected officials (such as heads of state), entertainers with commercialized productions, authors of published materials, and professional athletes can reasonably expect various details of their lives to receive coverage.

Having a Wikipedia article may make you a celebrity of some sort, but before wanting one so badly, be ready to have your personal life exposed. If you are seen at the side of the road being issued a speeding ticket, and that gets reported, it may end up in an article about you. If your house is foreclosed and this gets reported, it may find its way onto Wikipedia. And if you get into an argument with another person in public, someone may report that in a reliable source, and it will be fair game for Wikipedia.

따라서, 위키백과는 당신의 업적을 선전하기 위해서 있는 곳이 아닙니다. 많은 공을 들여서, 잠시 동안은 당신을 아주 멋진 모습으로 서술하는 문서를 만들 수 있겠지요. 하지만 다른 사람의 손길을 거치면, 그 문서는 전혀 다른 문서가 될 수도 있습니다. 위키백과에서는 그 어떤 문서도 지금의 모습을 영원히 유지하지 않습니다. 당신의 직장 상사, 당신의 연인, 기타등등 당신이 잘 보이고 싶은 그 어떤 사람들이라도 그들 자신이 당신에 대해서 갖는 생각은 전혀 다를 수 있습니다. 그들이 위키백과에서 당신의 이야기를 읽는다면, 당신은 그들 모두에게 망신을 당할 수 있을지도 모릅니다.

Hopefully, by the time you are ready for a Wikipedia article that would meet all inclusion guidelines to exist, you already know what fame feels like, are already aware of what is being said about you, and what to expect.

당신이 꼭 알아야만 하는, 별 중요하지 않은 것들 편집

 
A memorial has been erected. It may be ignored by most passers-by, but it will surely be noticed by someone.

These are some miscellaneous things you should know in order to be prepared for there to be an article about you. They may be good or bad, depending on your expectations.

  • Since all information added to Wikipedia must be verifiable, this may make it difficult or impossible to defend yourself against sourced negative information added to an article about you. If the information is added within guidelines, you cannot tell "your side" of the story or otherwise provide a response.
  • Most terms, when entered into a Google search, will reveal 1-2 Wikipedia articles with an identical or closely matching title within the top 10, and often the first two hits. If there is an article about you, and your name is googled, especially if it is uncommon, chances are the article will come up as one of the first hits.
  • Wikipedia is cloned by many other sites and has many mirrors and forks, perhaps hundreds that follow a single article. If your name was never previously found via a Google search, and suddenly there is an article about you, it may lead to dozens of Google hits that are all some variation of either the current or a previous version of the article.
    A previous version of the article may contain possibly inaccurate derogatory statements which are not subject to editorial correction without a long, difficult and in some cases almost impossible process of locating, contacting, and persuading the person in control of the offending webpage to make the corrections you desire. Litigation might even be required, which would require advance expenditures and might not be successful.
  • There is a site called Deletionpedia that preserves copies of deleted Wikipedia articles. Even if you or someone else manages to get the article about you deleted, it may turn up there.
  • Random articles are often found by hitting the "Random article" tab on the left. Though there is no way of knowing exactly how often a random article is searched, every time the number of times this occurs exceeds the number of Wikipedia articles, there is a good chance (about 63.2%) that the article about you will be displayed to someone. Unless you are very well-known, that person probably has no prior knowledge of you, and is unlikely to care much one way or the other who you are or what you have done. That person, however, may examine the notability of the article, or look out for other issues it may have.
  • Even if there is nothing bad to say about you, vandalism on Wikipedia is quite common, and most articles are vandalized by someone at one time or another. Vandalism consists of a variety of additions, removals, and other changes, often including hate speech (possibly against your ethnicity or the cause you stand for), profanity, inappropriate images, external links, or just random characters. Vandalism is generally reverted quickly, but unless oversighted, will remain permanently in the edit history. Most edit histories are likely ignored unless they bear some significance. (Older versions that remained around for some time are often robotically cloned to other sites.)
  • If you share a name with one or more other people, there is a good chance the article will be found by someone either on a disambiguation page or hatnote who may otherwise have no interest in who you are but may read the article out of curiosity. For example, the article titled Michael Jackson is about the pop singer. It bears a hatnote that reads For other persons named Michael Jackson, see Michael Jackson (disambiguation). That page lists a few dozen other lesser-known people who have this common name. The article about James Joyce (the novelist) contains a hatnote that reads This article is about the 20th-century writer with a link that leads to articles on other people called James Joyce, for example a baseball umpire and a 19th century politician. You would probably not expect that a reader looking for information about a specific person would read up on a different person in an unrelated field simply because that different person shares the specific person's name (e.g. you probably wouldn't expect someone trying to find out about the writer named James Joyce to read up on the congressmen named James Joyce simply because of the shared name), but there are many curious people who just might do exactly that.
  • If you do not push to have an article about you on Wikipedia, but one was created without your involvement, you are probably notable for something to begin with. Any negative coverage about you has probably been known already to someone. But since Wikipedia joins multiple sources of information about you together, something that is not known to readers of one external source may suddenly be known just because Wikipedia readers are given instant access to multiple sources. In addition to being summarized within the article, footnoted sources are often external links, and readers of the article can then click on them and read in full something they would otherwise not know. So if Source A says only nice things about you, and Source B sounds more negative, a reader who has relied on Source A (who thought nice things about you) who decides also to read Wikipedia may suddenly learn about what is in Source B.

위키백과:이해관계의 충돌 정책이 어떻게 적용되는가 편집

위키백과의 문서는 개인 소유가 아닙니다. 편집

Read the conflict of interest (COI) policy. It applies to you and limits your ability to edit out any negative material from "your" article because you do not "own" it. There can be serious consequences if you ignore this policy because the Law of Unintended Consequences always applies:

If you write in Wikipedia about yourself, your group, your company, or your pet idea, once the article is created, you have no right to control its content, and no right to delete it outside our normal channels. Content is not deleted just because somebody doesn't like it. Any editor may add material to or remove material from the article within the terms of our content policies. If there is anything publicly available on a topic that you would not want included in an article, it will probably find its way there eventually. More than one user has created an article only to find themself presented in a poor light long-term by other editors. If you engage in an edit war in an attempt to obtain a version of your liking you may have your editing access removed, perhaps permanently.
In addition, if your article is found not to be worthy of inclusion in the first place, it will be deleted, as per our deletion policies. Therefore, don't create promotional or other articles lightly, especially on subjects you care about.

위키백과는 자신에 대한 이야기를 쓰는 곳이 아닙니다. 편집

The one fundamental rule for inclusion of any article here is notability as established in third party sources. Too many biographies exist here on people who aren't really all that notable, but by "squeezing blood" out of their pitifully few "turnips", they end up with a biography. They may think it's a good thing, but many end up regretting it. Even many famous people wish they didn't have a biography here. Some have threatened to sue Wikipedia to get theirs removed, but few succeed, as well they shouldn't.

Biographies should really only be written by third parties who discover a person's notability because they are truly notable, not because a friend or family member thinks they are more notable than they really are. We don't have autobiographies here, so if you started the article and thought you could promote yourself with a hagiographic article, you will quickly discover that you can't eat your cake and have it too. Why? Because your "autobiography" will quickly be turned into a biography. According to our policies, once the article has "gone public", it is too late for the author to do much of anything to keep it only positive, especially because it is thanks to NPOV that unsavory details get added, as they should. In fact, such attempts are considered disruptive and a violation of our NPOV policy. If the author now regrets that such details have been added and (mis)uses the "articles for deletion" (AFD) process to plead for the article to be deleted, their pleadings will actually violate the principles written above. They should have known about the COI warning above, but they chose to ignore it. Too bad. One could say that this is the just rewards of attempting to misuse Wikipedia for promotion or advocacy. We don't write hagiographies or sales brochures here, and we don't allow whitewashing.

This is a serious encyclopedia, not a free webhosting service where personal articles can be written and displayed on the world's biggest "billboard". To seek to misuse Wikipedia to write a hagiography, and then seek to misuse the AfD process to undo the unintended consequences of ignoring policies just won't do. One cannot rejoice when a policy-violating article somehow initially makes it through, but then regret when it gets revised into an article that abides by our NPOV policy. Such an AfD strikes right at the heart of our most sacred policy, NPOV. The proper response to all such AfDs is to keep the article with its negative content and make it even better.

What can be learned from all this? Seeking fame comes with a price, and part of that price may be an article here! "The higher they climb, the harder they fall." Self-promotion is often not a good thing, because "pride goes before a fall.".

기업 또는 조직에 대한 문서 편집

 
Wal-Mart is renowned for selling plenty of goods at low prices, but the company is also opposed for a variety of reasons.

Just like an article about you or someone close to you, articles about companies and organizations can face the same issues. It may be exciting if the company you started and are trying to grow gets a Wikipedia article, but the purpose of the article is not to sell its goods or services, or to link to sites that do so (though a company's own site may be linked). Articles here are not sales brochures.

An article about a company or organization is not here to promote it; it is here to tell about it from a neutral point-of-view, using the information published about it in reliable sources. In many cases this will often include criticism of the company.

Many articles on companies and organizations have their own criticism sections. Some even have their own sub-articles devoted to those criticisms (e.g. Criticism of Wal-Mart, Criticism of Amnesty International). Wikipedia's mission is not to damage a company's or organization's reputation. Negative thoughts about these entities will probably be well-known to some of the public, and opinions one way or the other will be well-formulated in many people long before such an article is written, but once that article is written, many more people will know.

Still, even a single sourced scandal involving a company that is in its infancy, or even in a company around for a long time, can end up on Wikipedia. For example, the Peanut Corporation of America wound up with a Wikipedia article as a result of a food safety scandal. It was the scandal itself, not the Wikipedia article that led to the company's demise, but the company had no mention on Wikipedia until the scandal broke in the news, and the article certainly didn't help the company.

위안거리 편집

믿으실지 말지는 자유입니다만, 위키백과는 이 세상 다른 곳들보다 당신을 더 친절하게 대해드립니다. 위키백과는 기록될만한 가치가 있는 모든 지식, 사실, 사건, 사람, 역사, 의견, 기타 등등을 기록하기 위해서 존재하기 때문에, 위키백과에는 수록된 문서의 객관성을 담보하고 당신 자신에 대한 이야기일 수 있는 사실들을 고의로 깎아내리는 악의적인 손길을 물리칠 수 있는 장치를 만들어 두고 있습니다. 위키백과는 개인 홈페이지나 블로그, TV 종합편성 프로그램, 황색 신문이나 그런 것들처럼 당신을 막 다루지 않을 것입니다. 그럼에도 당신이 이해관계의 충돌 때문에 당신 자신의 문서를 제대로 편집할 수 없다면, 당신은 해당 문서의 토론 문서에서 의견을 개진하고 잘못된 사실을 시정해 달라고 요청할 수 있습니다.

이것을 위해 만들어진 규칙이 있습니다.

  • 백:중립 ensures coverage of all angles, not just the negative ones, unless that is the subject of a "legitimate" content fork. (Examples: Vaccine controversy, Global warming controversy, Chiropractic controversy and criticism, Dental amalgam controversy) Such forking keeps your main article from becoming unbalanced and is an application of the "Undue weight" policy mentioned below. Note that the main article will always remain balanced since it covers all sides of the issues.
  • Undue weight ensures that information is placed in proper perspective and that balance is maintained.
  • 위키백과:생존 인물의 전기 (BLP) ensures that negative information must be extremely well-sourced. Your enemies' blogs and mass email newsletters will likely not be allowed as reliable sources. The BLP policy actually applies to every living person, not just the subject of articles here. It protects you, other editors, and everyone else. That's pretty good protection! Reverts of BLP violations are even exempt from the three-revert rule.
  • Libel policy protects you from defamation. If you feel libelled, follow its advice.
  • 백:검증백:신뢰출처 규정이 있어, 검증되지 않은 함량미달의 내용은 위키백과에 등재될 수 없습니다.
  • Not a battleground keeps Wikipedia and your article from being used as a battleground for your real world enemies who wish to use Wikipedia, the article, or its talk page, to attack you.
  • Not scandal mongering or gossip keeps your article from becoming a yellow journalism hit piece.

그러므로 당신이 위키백과에서 당신에 대해서 안 좋은 이야기를 읽었다고 하더라도 침착해지십시오. 위키백과가 아니었다면 당신은 더 심하게 모독당했을지도 모르니까요. 위키백과 바깥에서는 당신 스스로를 지키기 힘들 것입니다만, 위키백과에서는 당신이 스스로를 지킬 근거로 쓸 수 있는 규정들이 있습니다.\

각설하고, 위키백과에 당신 자신에 대한 문서가 있다면 당신은 검색엔진에 걸릴 확률이 매우 높아지셨을 겁니다.

See also 편집

틀:Essays on building Wikipedia