JAY JG wrote:
Wikipedia couldn't possibly represent ALL views, nor should it. There are 6 billion people in the world, each with their own view on a limitless array of topics. Even if we limit ourselves to the much smaller (though still overwhelming) number of views that are, say, published on websites, NPOV does not demand that we say "according to Einstein e=mc^2, but according to my Aunt Gertie [www.relativityaccordingtogertie.com], e=mc^3"
Actually, from [[WP:NPOV]]:
Articles that compare views need not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views. We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by only a small minority of people deserved as much attention as a majority view. That may be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. If we are to represent the dispute fairly, we should present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties. None of this, however, is to say that minority views cannot receive as much attention as we can possibly give them on pages specifically devoted to those views. There is no size limit to Wikipedia. But even on such pages, though a view is spelled out possibly in great detail, we still make sure that the view is not represented as the truth.
So while we don't necessarily have to give Gertie a spot besides Einstein, the NPOV policy says that:
a) We only give Einstein more space in the main article because his view is more popular, not because it's more credible; and b) Gertie can (and should) be given space if someone's willing to write the article.
Now that may seem ridiculous to you, but that's what the policy page says! If that's not actually what we want to be doing, then we should change the policy, not ignore it. It seems to me Wikipedia has a whole lot of policy that if you read it closely doesn't describe how things are actually done at all. I want to fix that: either by getting people to follow the policy, or getting the policy changed.
Shane.