[WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV

[Phil Sandifer]

On Dec 28, 2008, at 9:58 AM, Carcharoth wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Phil Sandifer  
> <snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> So basically, we have a phrase that mandates the violation of NPOV on
>> a host of articles, that was inserted without discussion, and that  
>> has
>> been controversial in every subsequent discussion. But we keep it,
>> because it's "consensus."
>
> Have you tried suggesting this change on the talk page and advertising
> the discussion at various relevant noticeboards and other project talk
> pages?

I'm sorry, I should give a more complete answer here.

Yes, and among the stellar responses created by the people who  
currently populate our policy talk pages and thus, by default, control  
our policy formation is that the correct solution is to not cover the  
criticism of the person in depth either, thus removing the balance  
problem.

Yes. Apparently the road to a NPOV encyclopedia is now to avoid  
posting any information whatsoever.

This is what happens when the old-timers leave the policy pages, by  
the way. The worst of the Taylorized take over.

Which is why I keep bringing these things up on the list - in the  
hopes that the comparative sanity of the list will wander back to the  
policy pages and start fixing these messes.

-Phil