[WikiEN-l] Re: Crappy prose isn't the main "quality" problem.

[Anthony DiPierro]

On 10/25/05, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Does NPOV or NOR allow analysis at all? Not in the slightest.
>
> While it is meant to discourage pushing a viewpoint and putting uncited
> research up on Wikipedia, what would happen if someone were to analyze a
> point in an article?
>
> In some cases it would seem to be pushing a point of view (even if the
> opposite POV is expressed) and sometimes would cause an edit war
>
> In other cases it would be seen as original research (oh no! You can't say
> that without citing it!)
>
> Maybe I'm just not understanding correctly what you mean by analyzing.


I was thinking the same thing. Wikipedia's policies don't really allow for
analysis or presentation of value judgements. They don't allow "comment on
literary merit". And unless I'm misunderstanding what these critics want, I
agree with the policies, that we shouldn't try to do this.

There are some complaints above that we should address, but others I think
we should ignore.

Anthony