Sam Korn wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:36 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/5 Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com
I think it's very clear that wikipedia has developed a very successful model, not least because many other wikis seem to almost automatically adopt our style and policies. In short: Wikipedia Works.
NPOV is our key innovation. Much more radical than letting anyone edit the website.
I agree. The only way a wiki that says "anyone can edit" can work is with NPOV. You can either enforce a POV by banning people who don't share your point of view, or you can explicitly endorse *no-one's* point of view.
An enforced POV cannot really be neutral.
(Similarly, NPOV would be extremely difficult to manage with a small base of users as discussion (and, to some extent, conflict) is essential.)
Not really, in a paradoxical way. Many rarely visited articles on non-controversial subjects already achieve that neutrality. An unchallenged article written by a single person is neutral at the moment it is written, and remains so until challenged. If the content is outrageous that neutrality will seldom last more than a few minutes.
Ec