I fail to see how that applies to what I said,
actually. I was
discussing our NPOV policy, not objectivity. The NPOV policy is
something we approach by admitting all verifiable opinions as statements
of fact regarding the existence of such opinions. It is not an attempt
to produce a truly objective view of the universe. None of us is God,
but we can all aspire to peacefully, and without undue judgmentalism,
incorporate divergent views on whether or not God exists into our
encyclopedia.
It applied at least to what Steve said. He used the argument of cultural
diversity (transferred on wikipedia in wikipedias in zeveral languages) to
indicatethe inaccurateness of the NPOV-ideal. I wanted to oppose that.
You are right in saying objectivity and NPOV are not the same. Neutrality
originates form Latin "neuter" mening neither (ne-uter "none of
both"), so a
Neutral Point of View simply means that there are at least two factions with
both/ each a fair deal of followers and that the statements agree with
neither/ none of them. So, I agree with you and I am convinced Wikipedia can
achieve this.
Wouter
_________________________________________________________________
Nooit ongewenste berichten ontvangen: gebruik MSN Messenger
http://messenger.msn.nl/