[Textbook-l] Problem with NPOV

[Andrew Whitworth]

Good point on the religious books, there is a fine line between POV and NPOV 
that I don't think many people follow when it comes to their faith. After 
all, a person wouldn't be a member of a particular religion if they didnt 
think that religion was the "undisputable truth". I've been watching those 
books you mention reasonably closely, and while I think there are a few NPOV 
and cleanup issues here and there, I dont think either book is exactly in 
need of deletion.

There is a difference in saying what a particular group believes, and what 
people ''should'' believe. So long as they stay with the first option, they 
can be on wikibooks.

--Whiteknight


>What do you think of 
>http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Christianity/Living_as_a_Christian and 
>http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Imamat_or_Successorship_After_the_Last_Prophet_of_God#Successorship?
>
>I noticed there are more and more users who contribute to books that are 
>made with strongly islamic point of view (we already have some texts about 
>islam: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:Islam), with nicks like 
>"Truebeliever", "Believer" etc. I'm afraid that we might attract some 
>zealots who see us as a good place to develop propaganda. Generally, I 
>think that we should think how we should treat books about religious 
>topics.
>
>--
>Piotr 'Derbeth' Kubowicz
>Jabber id: derbeth at jabber.wp.pl
>
>Pomó¿ Wikibooks stworzyæ najwiêkszy zbiór otwartych podrêczników! 
>http://pl.wikibooks.org/
>
>Opera - the fastest browser on Earth! http://www.opera.com/
>_______________________________________________
>Textbook-l mailing list
>Textbook-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l