Wikipedia talk:Vagueness

Regulation Change
The regulations have changed and the content of the page is invalid. EME requirements has changed. RS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.87.180.236 (talk) 05:27, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Please tell us your conserns


 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:8303:af20:1c1c:8d71:609b:e5f6 (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge?
It appears that this essay covers the same scope as MOS:WTW, to which this page should probably be merged with. 2600:1700:A2A0:FB50:951E:9D9A:F168:AF9F (talk) 03:58, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support; merge into #Expressions that lack precision in the corresponding article --Firestar464 (talk) 03:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Confusing unclear
These are subjective qualifications. So be more clear as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koitus~nlwiki (talk • contribs) 23:57, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

WP:Vague now redirects here
Vague and WP:Vague now redirect here (to WP:Vagueness). I submitted it on How to make a redirect ✔

— Massmediazealot (talk) 08:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Merge with Manual of Style/Words to watch ?
I agree with @2600:1700:A2A0:FB50:951E:9D9A:F168:AF9F and @Firestar464 above that these articles overlap and should be merged.

I will add "See also: Please clarify and Vagueness" to:
 * Manual of Style/Words to watch
 * Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Vocabulary#Subset terms

—Massmediazealot (talk) 09:23, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

I see at least one situation where vagueness should be allowed
Some of best works of popularizing science include not only results, but also methods to reach those results (e.g. works of Michael Faraday, Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Richard Feynman).

If I were addressing Feynmann's methods in Wikipedia, and citing his speech when he accepted his Nobel Prize in Physics, where he talked about how he searched for the solutions he was awarded that prize for, I would need to use so called weasel words, and vaguenes, because (s)he used them then.

An example from Feynmann's speech at the banquet then, with most of what might be unclear, tagged: Your Majesty, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen. The work I have done has, already, been adequately rewarded and recognized.

Imagination reaches out repeatedly trying to achieve some higher level of understanding, until suddenly I find myself momentarily alone before one new corner of nature’s pattern of beauty and true majesty revealed. That was my reward.

Then, having fashioned tools to make access easier to the new level, I see these tools used by other men straining their imaginations against further mysteries beyond. There, are my votes of recognition. How it should be - from Feynmann's speech at the Nobel Banquet: Your Majesty, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen. The work I have done has, already, been adequately rewarded and recognized.

Imagination reaches out repeatedly trying to achieve some higher level of understanding, until suddenly I find myself momentarily alone before one new corner of nature’s pattern of beauty and true majesty revealed. That was my reward.

Then, having fashioned tools to make access easier to the new level, I see these tools used by other men straining their imaginations against further mysteries beyond. There, are my votes of recognition. Feynmann was notable as a speaker, and a lecturer of distinction; this quote was taken from his speech published by (and is cited to) a hopefully W:RS publisher.

Please, don't misuse such templates like I did here. And please, don't remove this whole section, if nobody addresses these claims about vagueness etc. for too long (and clears whole section out, as I have seen done in articles by too overburdenend, and a bit fast-fingered, patrollers). Regards,

Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 01:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)