Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Relevance is the connection between topics that makes one useful for dealing with the other. Relevance is studied in many different fields, including cognitive science, logic, and library and information science. Epistemology studies it in general, and different theories of knowledge have different implications for what is considered relevant.
Relevance level "Medium" – Information that is "once removed" is less directly relevant, should receive a higher level of scrutiny and achieve higher levels in other areas (such as neutrality, weight and strength [further explanation needed] and objectivity of the material and sourcing) before inclusion, but may still may be sufficiently ...
On Wikipedia, relevance is simply whether a fact is in the right article, based on whether it pertains to the article's subject. Usually this is obvious. Usually this is obvious. When not obvious, relevance is decided by the editors of the article, based on what is considered likely to be useful to readers.
Once relevance levels have been assigned to the retrieved results, information retrieval performance measures can be used to assess the quality of a retrieval system's output. In contrast to this focus solely on topical relevance, the information science community has emphasized user studies that consider user relevance. [3]
The relevance of information is best demonstrated by the provision of reliable sources, and of suitable context. The bulk of Wikipedia's content consists of: Basic description – which explains what the subject is , what it does (or did), and what it is notable for.
Relevance theory also attempts to explain figurative language such as hyperbole, metaphor and irony. Critics have stated that relevance, in the specialised sense used in this theory, is not defined well enough to be measured. Other criticisms include that the theory is too reductionist to account for the large variety of pragmatic phenomena.
2.1 Practical realities of "relevancy" in Wikipedia. 2.2 Guiding principles. 2.2.1 Content must be about the subject of the article.
Wikipedia:Secondary does not mean independent, an essay on the difference between first-person, first-party, and primary sources. Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources; Wikipedia:Viability of lists; Wikipedia:Search engine test [cf. Google (verb) ?] Wikipedia:Recentism; Wikipedia:Relevance of content