[Wikipedia-l] pitching an idea

Chad Perrin perrin at apotheon.com
Sun Apr 17 17:08:40 UTC 2005

On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 12:36:45PM -0400, Steve Lefevre wrote:
> Furthermore, I don't buy any claims to NPOV. Language is inherently 
> biased. One bias is what gets mentioned. Wikipedia is more comprehensive 
> than other encyclopedias in another realm, but  Another bias is what 
> gets mentioned first. Wikipedia articles are currently serial, so there 
> is always an order to the mentioning of any topic. There are also biases 
> in the wording and terminology of 'controversial' figures and unpopular 
> viewpoints. Who arbitrates who is controversial, or what is unpopular? 
> In the sign-off system I propose, we actually have hard numbers as to 
> what is controversial and unpopular.

I disagree with that characterization of NPOV as a goal.  Rather than
say that it's some kind of myth to which we pretend to subscribe here,
I'm of the opinion that it's more an asymptote rather than a point on a
graph, and we are (in general) "approaching NPOV" incrementally with our
efforts.  The fact that we may never reach an absolute value of NPOV
idoesn't make it any less real, though.

Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

More information about the Wikipedia-l mailing list