[WikiEN-l] "should not be written by an interested party"

[Jimmy Wales]

Peter Jacobi wrote:
> There are even topics so obscure ([[New Kadampa Tradition]] comes
> to my mind), that only vocal opponents and vocal proponents
> contribute. Should they already be considered "interested
> parties"? Shall we hope, that they will battle it out so that the
> result is NPOV?

The philosophy that NPOV is achieved by warring parties is one that I
have always rejected, and in practice, I think we can easily see that it
absolutely does not work.

I would prefer to have no article on [[New Kadampa Tradition]] than to
have one which is a constant battleground for partisans, taking up huge
amounts of times of good editors, legal people, and me.

What is preferred, of course, is that thoughtful, reasonable people who
know something about the subject interact in a helpful way to seek
common ground.


-- 
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################