[Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

[Fred Bauder]

> On Sat, 5 Oct 2013, at 18:47, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> I've been thinking about this. Wikipedia is a compilation of
>> information
>> from sources that are generally considered reliable. The trouble is
>> that
>> the information in those sources varies. Rather than deciding
>> ourselves,
>> after all most of us are amateurs, what the truth is, we present all
>> the
>> views in reliable sources without trying to decide which is right or
>> even
>> better, although there may be sourced information which does do that
>> which can be included.
>>
>> Fred
>
> This is simply false. If a third source says that one of two reliable
> sources is wrong or simply worse, the third source is not ignored.

It is not "simply" false. Provided such a criticism is found in a
reliable source, neutral point of view would require it be included. For
example, in a climate change article, information about the poor factual
basis of climate change denial should be included.

Fred