[WikiEN-l] Re: original research, sources, and verification

[steven l. rubenstein]

>"Tony Sidaway" <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
>
>Quality of source is usually (but not always) POV. We're supposed to be
>writing NPOV articles.
>A caveat such as "warning: the article relies on population projections
>that were proven by events to be grossly in error" is fine and NPOV. A
>caveat such as "the claims at this site are patently incorrect" is POV and
>superfluous. Otherwise rely on the general site content disclaimer and
>the reader's commonsense.

I believe this misrepresents our policy.  NPOV is very important as a guide 
to both content and behavior.  But it is not our only policy.  Nor original 
research, verifiability, and cite sources are equally important 
policies.  Moreover, those policies make clear that differences in the 
nature and reliability or repute of sources must be taken into account and 
acknowledged in articles.

If this were not the case, and if NPOV were the only policy, or a policy 
that trumps all others, then Wikipedia would not be an encyclopedia, it 
would be a bulletin board for everyone's views on everything -- more like 
Everything2, maybe.  I oppose this.

I understand that the two policies -- say, NPOV and Verifiability -- may 
come into conflict.  On such occasions we need to be very careful as we 
attempt to negotiate an outcome that is, as best possible, in accordance 
with the spirit of both policies.  But one cannot absolutely trump the other.

Steve






Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701