Editing Neutrality dispute
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
''And which are very likely to sink Wikipedia itself before it is five years old - it is already generating a goodly number of forks leading to a [[bad copy problem]] - one will replace it as the "leading arbiter of the [[GFDL text corpus]]". At that point [[w:]] may point somewhere else, or be replaced by another prefix like [[n:]] to mean most reliable [[neutral point of view]].'' | ''And which are very likely to sink Wikipedia itself before it is five years old - it is already generating a goodly number of forks leading to a [[bad copy problem]] - one will replace it as the "leading arbiter of the [[GFDL text corpus]]". At that point [[w:]] may point somewhere else, or be replaced by another prefix like [[n:]] to mean most reliable [[neutral point of view]].'' | ||
So what does one do when neutrality is disputed in the content wiki? Removing isolating disputed claims to [[Opinion Wiki]] circles is not enough | So what does one do when neutrality is disputed in the content wiki? Removing isolating disputed claims to [[Opinion Wiki]] circles is not enough, although in that Wiki, the "NPOV" approach may be enough. In Content, we must know roughly the balance and affiliation of types of advocates of a view, probably need several distinct POVs (ecology, human environment, labour, community impact, etc.) in the [[Consumerium buying signal]]. The actual end user is not interested in a balance of a lot of other people's views or values, it's their own they want reliably expressed in that signal, so the segmenting by [[faction]] and [[tendency]] seems to be the only way to make that decision. | ||
It also means that there would be "no such thing as NPOV" in the content wiki - the neutrality disputes would arise only WITHIN factions where presumably they could be dealt with in a [[factionally defined]] way. | It also means that there would be "no such thing as NPOV" in the content wiki - the neutrality disputes would arise only WITHIN factions where presumably they could be dealt with in a [[factionally defined]] way. |