2007/8/10, Yury Tarasievich <yury.tarasievich(a)gmail.com>om>:
What's troubling me now is that what you say
seems to me
likecontradicting the following pieces in the WP:OR:
* The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.
In what way is this contradictory? It is only contradictory if you
take this to mean "anything that is verifiable should be in Wikipedia"
- and even then it still does not say what article it should be in.
* In many cases, there are multiple established
views of any given
topic. In such cases, no single position, no matter how well
researched, is authoritative. It is not the responsibility of any one
editor to research all points of view. But when incorporating research
into an article, it is important that editors provide context for this
point of view, by indicating how prevalent the position is, and
whether it is held by a majority or minority.
A bit further down, it says:
If your viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, then —
whether it's true or not, whether you can prove it or not — it doesn't
belong in Wikipedia, except perhaps in some ancillary article.
--
Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
Yury, you have opened a can of worms.
The critera for source is not so biased in favour of who has the largest
voice. Sources must come from established notable publications. in terms of
the english wikipedia, no not everything has to be in the English language,
but main sources must be to be credible.
Who decides what is a fringe theory? 9/11 theorists, JFK theorists and for
this list Armenian genocide theorists? I don't know what is a deciding
factor apart from we should report what the mainstream writes. Should
Wikipedia be wrong in these circumstances - yes. Is Wikipedia being
"hoodwinked" by only reporting what is mainstream knowledge? possibly. Where
do alternative theories fit? well they fit somewhere in every article, but
must be played down.
Deletion because "I don't agree" was never my idea and I think the concept
is against everything Wikipedia is about. I much favor moving "controversial
subjects" to talk and discuss them there before we wikiarmageddon.
mikey