On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 00:52:19 +0200, NSK nsk2@wikinerds.org wrote:
On Sunday 16 January 2005 00:04, Paweł 'Ausir' Dembowski wrote:
Saying that sofware patents are bad is a POV.
Not saying that software patents are bad is a POV.
No, saying that software patents *aren't* bad is a POV; not saying either is an *omission*; saying that there are people who believe both is NPOV.
If there were no article stating the case against software patents, *but there was one mentionning their advantages*, that would constitute a POV by omission.
But if not putting something *on the main page* constitutes declaring a POV for one side of the argument (which side?), then we're putting out a lot of points of view right now, because I don't see every debate in the world mentionned on Wikipedia's front page. [I wonder which side of the abortion debate we're supporting by advertising neither the "Right to life" nor the "Right to choose"...]
OK, so this is all a bit pedantic, but given that Wikimedia *isn't* a political advocacy Foundation - and in many ways strives to be the opposite - any exception to its normal neutrality would have to be considered very carefully indeed.