Neutrality dispute: Difference between revisions
links, intro
(clarifying) |
(links, intro) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A '''neutrality dispute''' is an assertion that the [[point of view]] of some article is not appropriate for its purpose, and reflects some [[editorial bias]]. The ideology that there is a '''neutral point of view''' asserts that this is corrected simply by attribution. However, it never extends to attribution of every single claim, therefore, it is an ideology not a methodology. ''See [[New Troll point of view]] for the counter-ideology.'' | |||
See [[w:NPOV dispute]] for an overly broad definition that includes things which are actually [[political dispute]]s. Wikipedia is run by a [[GodKing]] who reserves to himself the right to resolve or even redefine any political dispute in the real world and decide who is right for Wikipedia's purposes... this is an unwise confusion of [[sysop power structure]] with [[power structure]] and not to be copied for Consumerium purposes - something based on more democratic [[faction]]s and [[factionally defined]] terms and processes is almost certainly preferable. This would narrow the scope of "neutrality" to those issues that were not explicitly the subject of any political disputes. | See [[w:NPOV dispute]] for an overly broad definition that includes things which are actually [[political dispute]]s. Wikipedia is run by a [[GodKing]] who reserves to himself the right to resolve or even redefine any political dispute in the real world and decide who is right for Wikipedia's purposes... this is an unwise confusion of [[sysop power structure]] with [[power structure]] and not to be copied for Consumerium purposes - something based on more democratic [[faction]]s and [[factionally defined]] terms and processes is almost certainly preferable. This would narrow the scope of "neutrality" to those issues that were not explicitly the subject of any political disputes. | ||