[WikiEN-l] [[New anti-Semitism]] and violations of NPOV re: top image

[Cheney Shill]

To me, the most important aspect of NPOV has nothing to do with being "fair".  It has to do with removing your own personal opinion and accepting that of the experts on the topic, thus satisfying verifiability, even if it goes against what you prefer or previously believed.

Given that Britannica is both an easy target here and not NPOV according to your original research, do you have a paradigm for NPOV other than yourself and Wiki?
--Pro-Lick
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick 
http://www.wikiality.net/index.php?title=User:Pro-Lick 

Sarah <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote: On 8/25/06, Fastfission  wrote:
> scholarship it is very rare that anybody tries to be, or wants to be,
> neutral: neutrality is seen as "not taking a side" in an important
> debate, and only the most disingenous or aloof intellectuals would
> think not taking a side on issues is a good, much less ethical,
> approach.

I've also noticed that people from academic backgrounds have
difficulty with NPOV, because they're being asked to be equally fair
to positions they believe are nonsensical, and it goes against the
grain.

The thing that always strikes me now when I read the Encyclopaedia
Britannica is how POV it is, and I often wonder why we're aiming to be
as good as them, when in fact (at our best) we can be so much better.

 				
---------------------------------
Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.