উইকিপিডিয়া:জীবিত ব্যক্তির জীবনী

উইকিপিডিয়া, মুক্ত বিশ্বকোষ থেকে

উইকিপিডিয়ার যে কোন পাতায় কোন জীবিত ব্যক্তি সম্পর্কে কোন তথ্য যোগ করতে একজন সম্পাদককে অবশ্যই বিশেষভাবে যত্নবান হতে হবে।[১] এমন তথ্যাদির ব্যাপারে উচ্চমাত্রায় সংবেদনশীল হওয়ার প্রয়োজন, এবং যুক্তরাষ্ট্রে প্রযোজ্য আইন, এই নীতিমালা এবং আমাদের তিনটি মূল কন্টেন্ট নীতিমালার ব্যাপারে অবশ্যই কঠোর হতে হবেঃ

আমাদের অবশ্যই সঠিক নিবন্ধ পেতে হবে। উচ্চমানের সূত্রের ব্যবহারের ব্যাপারে অটল থাকুন। যে কোন প্রশ্ন এবং তথ্যাদি যা বিতর্ক তৈরি করে বা তৈরি করতে পারে তার অবশ্যই একটি নির্ভরযোগ্য, প্রকাশিত সূত্র ইনলাইন উদ্ধৃতিদানের মাধ্যমে উল্লেখ করতে হবে।জীবিত ব্যক্তির সম্পর্কে বিতর্কিত তথ্যাদি যা তথ্যসূত্র ছাড়া অথবা দূর্বল সূত্র উল্লেখিত— তা নেতিবাচক, ইতিবাচক, নিরপেক্ষ যাই হোক না কেন—অনতিবিলম্বে তা কোন আলোচনা ছাড়াই তাৎক্ষণিকভাবে অপসারণ করা উচিত।[২]

জীবিত ব্যক্তিদের জীবনী (BLP) অবশ্যই রক্ষণশীলভাবে লিখতে এবং এবং বিষয়ের গোপনীয়তা বজায় রাখতে হবে। উইকিপিডিয়া একটি বিশ্বকোষ, কোন ট্যবলয়েড নয়: চাঞ্চল্য সৃষ্টি করা উদ্দেশ্যে কোন কিছু করা অথবা কোন ব্যক্তির জীবনের সুড়সুড়ি দেওয়া চটকদার খবর প্রচারের মূখ্য বাহন হওয়া আমাদের কাজ নয়, এবং সম্পাদকীয় বিচারে সব সময় অবশ্যই জীবিত বিষয়ের সম্ভাব্য ক্ষতির বিষয়টি বিবেচনায় আনতে হবে। এই নীতিমালা সকল জীবিত ব্যক্তির জীবনীর ক্ষেত্রে প্রযোজ্য হবে, এমন কি যদিও নিবন্ধের বিষয় নয় কিন্তু কোন জীবিত ব্যক্তির জীবনীতে বা ঐ ব্যক্তির সম্পর্কে অন্য কোন পাতায় উল্লেখ করা হয়েছে এমন জীবিত ব্যক্তির ক্ষেত্রেও তা প্রযোজ্য হবে।[৩] যে ব্যক্তি এ ধরনের বিষয়বস্তু ও তথ্যাদি যোগ বা পুনরুদ্ধার করবে তা সাক্ষ্য প্রমাণের দায় ঐ ব্যক্তির উপরেই বর্তায়।

পরিচ্ছেদসমূহ

লিখনী শৈলী[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:BLPSTYLE

সুর[সম্পাদনা]

জীবিত ব্যক্তির জীবনী অবশ্যই অতিরঞ্জন এবং ন্যূনোক্তি দুটোই পরিহার করে রক্ষণাত্মক, দায়বন্ধ এবং নিঃস্বার্থ এমন সুরে লিখতে হবে। Articles should document in a non-partisan manner what reliable secondary sources have published about the subject, and in some circumstances what the subject has published about himself. BLPs should not have trivia sections.

সমালোচনা ও প্রশংসা[সম্পাদনা]

Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone. Do not give disproportionate space to particular viewpoints; the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all. Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation and section headings are broadly neutral. Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association, and look out for biased or malicious content.

আক্রমণাত্মক পাতাসমূহ[সম্পাদনা]

BLPs that are unsourced and negative in tone, and which appear to have been created to disparage the subject, should be deleted at once if there is no policy-compliant version to revert to; see below. Non-administrators should tag them {{db-attack}}.

নির্ভরযোগ্য সূত্রসমূহ[সম্পাদনা]

চ্যালেঞ্জ বা সম্বাব্য চ্যালেঞ্জ[সম্পাদনা]

Wikipedia's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not complying with this may be removed. This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable, and whether it is in a biography or in some other article.

উৎসবিহীন বা দুর্বল উৎসবিহীন বিতর্কিত উপাদান বাতিল করা[সম্পাদনা]

Remove immediately any contentious material about a living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced; that is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see No original research); that relies on self-published sources, unless written by the subject of the BLP (see below); or that relies on sources that fail in some other way to comply with Verifiability. The three-revert rule does not apply to such removals. Editors who find themselves in edit wars over potentially defamatory material about living persons should bring the matter to the BLP noticeboard. Administrators may enforce the removal of such material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked.

পরচর্চা এবং প্রতিক্রিয়া এড়িয়ে চলুন[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:GRAPEVINE

Avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject. Beware of sources that use weasel words and that attribute material to anonymous sources. Also be wary of feedback loops, in which material in a Wikipedia article gets picked up by a source, which is later cited in the Wikipedia article to support the original edit.

প্রাথমিক উৎসের অপব্যবহার[সম্পাদনা]

Exercise caution in using primary sources. Do not use public records that include personal details—such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses—or trial transcripts and other court records or public documents, unless a reliable secondary source has published the material. Where primary-source material was first published by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to turn to open records to augment the secondary source, subject to the no original research policy.

স্বপ্রকাশিত উৎস এড়িয়ে চলুন[সম্পাদনা]

সংক্ষিপ্ত:

Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, or tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject (see below). "Self-published blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. Some news organizations host online columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. Where a news organization publishes an opinion piece but claims no responsibility it, the writer of the cited piece should be attributed (e.g., "Jane Smith has suggested..."). Posts left by readers are never acceptable as sources.[৪] See below for our policy on self-published images.

সংশ্লিষ্ঠ বিষয়কে স্ব-প্রকাশিত উৎস হিসেবে ব্যবহার[সম্পাদনা]

Living persons may publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if:

  1. it is not unduly self-serving;
  2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
  3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
  4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
  5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

These provisions do not apply to autobiographies published by reliable third-party publishing houses, because they are not self-published.

সন্দেহজনক উৎস ও বহিঃসংযোগ[সম্পাদনা]

Material available solely in questionable sources should not be used anywhere in the article, including in "Further reading" or "External links" sections (see above). External links about living persons in BLPs and elsewhere are judged by a stricter standard than for other articles. Do not link to websites that contradict the spirit of this policy or are not compliant with Wikipedia:External links. Where the external links guideline is inconsistent with this or any other policy, the policies prevail.

গোপনীয়তার ক্ষেত্রে অনুমান[সম্পাদনা]

নিপীড়ন এড়িয়ে চলুন[সম্পাদনা]

When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic. This is of particular importance when dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely or entirely from being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization.

পাবলিক ফিগার[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:WELLKNOWN

In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If it is not documented by reliable third-party sources, leave it out.

  • Example: "John Doe had a messy divorce from Jane Doe." Is this important to the article, and was it published by third-party reliable sources? If not, leave it out, or stick to the facts: "John Doe divorced Jane Doe."
  • Example: A politician is alleged to have had an affair. He denies it, but The New York Times publishes the allegations, and there is a public scandal. The allegation belongs in the biography, citing the New York Times as the source.

প্রাথমিক উৎসসমূহ[সম্পাদনা]

Do not use primary sources, such as public records that include personal details, unless a reliable secondary source has already published the information; see above.

বিষয় যারা উল্লেখযোগ্য কিন্তু পরিচিত নয়[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:NPF

Wikipedia contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability, focusing on secondary sources. Material published by the subject may be used, but with caution; see above. Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care; in many countries repeating defamatory claims is actionable, and there is additional protection for people who are not public figures. Any potentially damaging material about a living person may be included only if (1) it is corroborated by highly reliable sources, (2) it is relevant to the subject's notability, and (3) the Wikipedia article assumes no position on the material's veracity.

বিষয় যারা শুধুমাত্র একটি ঘটনার জন্য বিখ্যাত[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:BLP1E

Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information. Merely being in the news does not imply someone should be the subject of Wikipedia article. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article. If the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate biography may be appropriate. Individuals notable for well-documented events, such as John Hinckley, Jr., fit into this category. The significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources.

নামের গোপনীয়তা[সম্পাদনা]

সংক্ষিপ্ত:

Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Consider whether the inclusion of names of private living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability.

ব্যক্তিগত তথ্যের গোপনীয়তা[সম্পাদনা]

সংক্ষিপ্ত:

With identity theft on the rise, people increasingly regard their dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes dates of birth where these have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object. Where the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, or where the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year. In a similar vein, articles should not include postal addresses, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, or other contact information for living persons, though links to websites maintained by the subject are generally permitted.

নিরোধক আদেশ[সম্পাদনা]

Subjects who have restraining orders may need to make special requests, which should be handled through the OTRS system.

চিত্রসমূহ[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:MUG

Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. This is particularly important for police booking photographs (mugshots), or situations where the subject was not expecting to be photographed. Images of living persons that have been generated by Wikipedians and others may be used if they have been released under a copyright licence that is compatible with Wikipedia:Image use policy.

বিষয়শ্রেণীসমূহ[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:BLPCAT

Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for each category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources. Categories regarding religious beliefs and sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question; and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to his notable activities or public life, according to reliable published sources. Caution should be used with categories that suggest a person has a poor reputation (see false light). For example, Category:Criminals and its subcategories should only be added for an incident that is relevant to the person's notability; the incident was published by reliable third-party sources; the subject was convicted; and the conviction was not overturned on appeal.

অ-নিবন্ধ নামস্থান[সম্পাদনা]

Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced, poorly sourced, or not related to making content choices, should be removed, deleted, or oversighted as appropriate. When seeking advice about whether to publish something about a living person, be careful not to post so much information on the talk page that the inquiry becomes moot; consider using off-wiki communication instead. The same principle applies to problematic images. Questionable claims already discussed can be removed with a reference to the previous discussion.

The BLP policy also applies to user and user talk pages. The single exception is that users may make any claim they wish about themselves in their user space, so long as they are not engaged in impersonation, and subject to What Wikipedia is not, though minors are discouraged from disclosing identifying personal information on their userpages; for more information, see here.[৫] Although this policy applies to posts about Wikipedians in project space, some leeway is permitted to allow the handling of administrative issues by the community, but administrators may delete such material if it rises to the level of defamation, or if it constitutes a violation of No personal attacks.

মৃত এবং আইনী ব্যক্তি[সম্পাদনা]

This policy does not apply to edits about the deceased, but material about the deceased may have implications for their living relatives and friends, particularly in the case of the recently deceased; anything questionable should be removed promptly. The policy also does not apply to edits about corporations, companies, and other entities regarded as legal persons, though any such material must comply with the other content policies.

জীবিত ব্যক্তির জীবনী এর রক্ষণাবেক্ষণ[সম্পাদনা]

রক্ষণাবেক্ষণের গুরুত্ব[সম্পাদনা]

Wikipedia contains hundreds of thousands of articles about living persons. From both a legal and ethical standpoint it is essential that a determined effort be made to eliminate defamatory and other inappropriate material from these articles, but these concerns must be balanced against other concerns, such as allowing articles to show a bias in the subject's favor by removing appropriate material simply because the subject objects to it, or allowing articles about non-notable publicity-seekers to be retained. When in doubt about whether material in a BLP is appropriate, the article should be pared back to a policy-compliant version. Sometimes the use of administrative tools such as page protection and deletion are necessary for the enforcement of this policy, and in extreme cases action by Wikimedia Foundation staff is required.

অর্ধ-সুরক্ষা, নিরাপত্তা, এবং ব্লক করা[সম্পাদনা]

Administrators who suspect malicious or biased editing, or believe that non-compliant material may be added or restored, may protect or semi-protect pages in accordance with the protection policy. Editors who repeatedly add or restore contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced may be blocked for disruption; see the blocking policy.

টেমপ্লেটসমূহ[সম্পাদনা]

{{BLP}} alerting readers to this policy may be added to the talk pages of BLPs and other articles that focus on living persons. {{Blpo}} is suitable for articles containing material on the deceased that also contains material about living persons. If a {{WPBiography}} template is present, you can add |living=yes to the template parameters. If a {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} template is also present, add |blp=yes to it. {{BLP dispute}} may be used on BLPs needing attention; {{BLP sources}} on BLPs needing better sourcing; and {{BLP unsourced}} for those with no sources at all. For editors violating this policy, the following can be used to warn them on their talk pages:

অপসারণ[সম্পাদনা]

নীতির সংক্ষিপ্ত:
WP:BLPDEL

Summary deletion, salting, and courtesy blanking[সম্পাদনা]

While a strategy of eventualism may apply to other subject areas, badly written BLPs should be stubbed or deleted. If the page's primary content is contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced; there is no obvious way to fix it; and there is no previous version of the page that is policy compliant, it may be necessary for an administrator to delete the page. The deleting administrator should be willing to explain the action, by e-mail if the material is sensitive. Those who object to the deletion should bear in mind that the deleting admin may be aware of issues that others are not. Disputes may be taken to deletion review, but protracted public discussion should be avoided for deletions involving sensitive personal material about living persons, particularly if it is negative. AfD and deletion review discussions may be courtesy blanked upon conclusion.[৬] After deletion, any administrator may choose to protect the article against recreation. Any policy-compliant material can be merged as appropriate into another relevant article, but anything merged in this way must comply with Wikipedia's licensing requirements; see Help:Merging#Performing the merger.

Where the concern is simply that the subject is borderline notable or has requested deletion, the issue should be discussed in the normal way, rather than addressed by summary deletion.

মুছে ফেলা উপাদান পুনরুদ্ধার[সম্পাদনা]

Editors adding, restoring, or undeleting material about living persons must ensure it meets all Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines. If material that was previously removed or deleted is to be restored without significant change, consensus must be obtained first, and wherever possible disputed deletions should be discussed first with the administrator who deleted the article. Material that has been repaired to address concerns should be judged on a case-by-case basis.

বিষয়, নিবন্ধ, এবং উইকিপিডিয়ার মধ্যে সম্পর্ক[সম্পাদনা]

নিবন্ধের বিষয় অনুসারে সম্পাদনা[সম্পাদনা]

সংক্ষিপ্ত:

Subjects sometimes become involved in editing material about themselves, either directly or through a representative. Although Wikipedia discourages people from writing about themselves, removal of unsourced or poorly sourced material is acceptable. When an anonymous editor blanks all or part of a BLP, this might be the subject attempting to remove problematic material; edits like this by subjects should not be treated as vandalism. The subject should be welcomed and invited to explain his concerns. The Arbitration Committee has ruled in favor of showing leniency to BLP subjects who try to fix what they see as errors or unfair material:

For those who either have or might have an article about themselves it is a temptation, especially if plainly wrong, or strongly negative information is included, to become involved in questions regarding their own article. This can open the door to rather immature behavior and loss of dignity. It is a violation of don't bite the newbies to strongly criticize users who fall into this trap rather than seeing this phenomenon as a newbie mistake.

Arbitration Committee decision (December 18, 2005)[৭]

আপনার নিজের নিবন্ধ[সম্পাদনা]

সংক্ষিপ্তসমূহ:

Wikipedia has editorial policies that will often help to resolve your concern, many users willing to help, and a wide range of escalation processes. Very obvious errors can be fixed quickly, including by yourself. But beyond that, post suggestions on the article talk page, or place {{adminhelp}} on your talk page. If you have reason to complain, please bear in mind that Wikipedia is almost entirely operated by volunteers, and impolite behavior, even if entirely understandable, will often be less effective and may even lead to a block. Please try hard to avoid heading in this direction.

কিভাবে উইকিমিডিয়া ফাউন্ডেশনে অভিযোগ করবেন[সম্পাদনা]

If you are not satisfied with the response of editors and admins to your concern, you can ask the Foundation's team of volunteers for help. Please e-mail info-en-q@wikimedia.org with a link to the article in question and specific details of the problem. For more information on how to complain, see here, and see here for how to contact the Wikimedia Foundation.

সমাধান[সম্পাদনা]

উইকিমিডিয়া ফাউন্ডেশন[সম্পাদনা]

On April 9, 2009, the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees passed a resolution regarding Wikimedia's handling of material about living persons. It noted that there are problems with some BLPs being overly promotional in tone, being vandalized, and containing errors and smears. The Foundation urges that special attention be paid to neutrality and verifiability regarding living persons; that human dignity and personal privacy be taken into account, especially in articles of ephemeral or marginal interest; that new technical mechanisms be investigated for assessing edits that affect living people; and that anyone who has a complaint about how they are described on the project's websites be treated with patience, kindness, and respect.


আরও দেখুন[সম্পাদনা]


পাদটিকা[সম্পাদনা]

  1. People are assumed to be living unless there is reason to believe otherwise. This policy does not apply to people declared dead in absentia.
  2. Jimmy Wales. "WikiEN-l Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information", May 16, 2006, and May 19, 2006; Jimmy Wales. Keynote speech, Wikimania, August 2006.
  3. Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rachel Marsden: "WP:BLP applies to all living persons mentioned in an article"
  4. From Wikipedia:Verifiability#cite_note-3.
  5. See Wikipedia:Credentials and its talk page.
  6. "...In the meantime, it is my position that MOST AfD pages for living persons or active companies should be courtesy blanked (at a minimum) as a standard process, and deleted in all cases where there was inappropriate commentary. This is not the current policy, but current policy does allow for deletions of material which is potentially hurtful to people." --Jimbo Wales 01:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  7. Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rangerdude#Mercy: "3) Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers, a guideline, admonishes Wikipedia users to consider the obvious fact that new users of Wikipedia will do things wrong from time to time. For those who either have or might have an article about themselves it is a temptation, especially if plainly wrong, or strongly negative information is included, to become involved in questions regarding their own article. This can open the door to rather immature behavior and loss of dignity. It is a violation of don't bite the newbies to strongly criticize users who fall into this trap rather than seeing this phenomenon as a newbie mistake. Passed 6-0-1"

আরও পাঠ করুন[সম্পাদনা]