Anthere wrote:
Stan Shebs a écrit:
I think you're working a bit too hard to find bias here. The Huygens probe had 1/2 of the original article created 2.5 years ago, and sizewise would have been fine to split even then, but somehow not one of 600+ million Europeans could be bothered to make the split, or to propose it on the talk page.
No, I am not working too hard. I am trying to report a reality, that you may perceive as "too hard to find bias"
However, what *really* is a measurement is the perception of our readers.
Right ?
Okay, this was reported to me by some french scientists. They know Wikipedia, and are often impressed by it. They were VERY impressed by the articles themselves. As I said, this was the most informative place aside from the couple of scientific reporting place. So, WE were a hit.
They were amused however, of that situation. They are in no way anti-american, but they laughed at our non bias policy in this case.
They know about the neutrality policy and are aware of how hard it is. The neutrality in this case, the so-called neutral report make them laugh their head of.
And you corrected them on this, right? This is absolutely nothing to do with NPOV, and it's unfair to hardworking editors to say that they're biased and not doing anything about it. What you report fits exactly into the worst stereotypes of the French; sneering at other people's work, but not taking any responsibility for having let this perceived problem go unmentioned for years. You said these scientists "know Wikipedia"; did you ask them why they didn't do anything about it themselves?
I also note for instance that (as of several hours ago) the French wikipedia had a single article with Huygens as the second half. Are we supposed to take that to mean the Europeans are biased against themselves?
There are enough real problems making WP unbiased and neutral; by taking a trivial point of organization never before discussed anywhere, and holding it up as something that matters, you're undercutting all the editors who put in real research and real discussion time on the issues that are genuinely important. Why should I bother spending two hours in the library to research a substantive question, when you're telling the world that WP is biased because some frontpage article doesn't cater enough to nationalistic pride?
The whole attitude really troubles me. I've put in a lot of WP time over the past two years, and now it feels like it doesn't matter.
Stan