Evidence is the available body of information which might indicate the veracity of a claim, and it's strangely hard to get right without the big support system the scientific community uses to double and triple check experimental data. In a world where argument can reshape the interpretation of any evidence This presents a remarkably simple, but incredibly important question: Who's right?
Relevance to para.wiki
With so many conflicting ideas on what the details and explanations of the paranormal are, to include if the phenomena exist at all, some way to determine which is the "right" one must necessarily exist. Rather than go through the tediousness and controversy of arbitrarily deciding who's right in the face of wildly incomplete information, it has been decided that all consistent theories should be treated with equal respect. Any given theory is assumed to be true within its own context and does not presume that the reader necessarily believe it.
When an article is written, it is not meant to represent absolute truth as you might find on wikis with the blessing of generally accepted evidence. The aim is only to present the evidence that exists for a belief to at best convince the reader of its veracity. Whether or not anything in this wiki is true is entirely dependent on the individual actually reading it. And yes, this applies to passages written from a skeptical perspective as well.
If you feel that any page has been drafted from an unduly slanted perspective, feel free to add it to a category that more accurately reflects the interpretation it was written from. This is, after all, a wiki.