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

[Michael Snow]

On 9/16/2013 7:33 PM, Risker wrote:
> I am not certain that neutral point of view applies to all Wikimedia
> projects.  Wikiversity programs may deliberately examine one aspect of a
> subject while ignoring others, for example. It is difficult to apply the
> concept of  "neutrality" to images and other media, some of which is
> explicitly non-neutral (see the Jyllands-Posten Muhammed images).  I am not
> sure that "neutral point of view" applies to Wiktionary at all.
Once the topic unit is selected (an article title in Wikipedia, a word 
in Wiktionary, or a destination in Wikivoyage, for example), I think a 
concept of neutrality within that topic is not actually that difficult. 
Whether we require it everywhere is a policy choice, but it is certainly 
possible. Maintaining the design of a Wikiversity program need not be 
different in kind from avoiding off-topic digressions in a Wikipedia 
article.

Obviously it makes sense to adapt our understanding of neutrality to the 
mission of each project. I believe our projects have generally tried 
conscientiously to maintain that spirit in a way that suits their 
context. But although it may superficially appear non-neutral to enforce 
criteria and boundaries for topic units, I think the answer to that lies 
in the ambition to universality of our projects. If by simply defining a 
topic we deviate from neutrality, the way to restore it is by covering 
all topics.

When dealing with source material, as with Wikimedia Commons or 
Wikisource, then "neutrality" may be a concept one step removed from the 
mission of the project. Faithful reproduction may be closer to what we 
are really looking for. However, neutrality is still a value worth 
considering in terms of the overall collection of source material, and 
certainly in how that material gets presented and contextualized in our 
other projects.

--Michael Snow