Wikipedia:Aesthetic opinions

This is an essay on aesthetic opinions.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: When aesthetic opinions such as "greatest" or "best" are used, there are some key points to consider.

It may be appropriate to say that a subject has been called "the greatest" if it is a widely-held opinion. The WP:SUBJECTIVE policy reads:

More generally, it is sometimes permissible to note a subject's reputation when that reputation is widespread and potentially informative or of interest to readers.

However, citing a few sources that something is "the greatest" does not support that it is "widely considered the greatest". Per the guideline MOS:WEASEL:

Weasel words are words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority, yet has no substantial basis.

However, such statements might be appropriate if a source analyzes the field of scholarship on the matter and explicitly declares that something is "widely considered the greatest". In that spirit, policy clause WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV stipulates:

"Most people think" is acceptable only when supported by at least one published survey.

Beware of fringe theories. The policy WP:EXCEPTIONAL warns against:

Surprising or apparently important claims not covered by multiple mainstream sources

MOS:WEASEL further adds:

[Weasel words] may legitimately be used in the lead section of an article or in a topic sentence of a paragraph when the article body or the rest of the paragraph can supply attribution. Likewise, views that are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions, if those expressions accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but for editors to do so would violate the Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policies.

Citing even 10 sources with a personal opinion about something's greatness does not support that it is "widely considered the greatest"; it is instead original research. Perhaps 100 reliable sources have opined on the subject's greatness and the other 90 have not deemed it the "greatest"; selecting only the 10 sources calling it the "greatest" can be considered a form of cherrypicking.

Unquantifiable rankings such as "one of the greatest" are inherently irrefutable due to their vagueness and ambiguity, so they should only be considered for usage when directly supported by a large proportion of the highest-quality sources.

See also