Please sign and share the petition 'Tighten regulation on taking, making and faking explicit images' at Change.org initiated by Helen Mort to the w:Law Commission (England and Wales) to properly update UK laws against synthetic filth. Only name and email required to support, no nationality requirement. See Current and possible laws and their application @ #SSF! wiki for more info on the struggle for laws to protect humans.

Talk:Neutrality dispute

From Consumerium development wiki R&D Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

n: to mean "best neutral view]] is very appealing. It would replace w: and would open the possibility of using Metaweb or another Wikipedia even, like Simple English Wikipedia. In fact the lookup could be per article with some hacks to the code. Though mediawiki will never do this, it being under the control of fascists, it seems easy to do it in tikiwiki or MoinMoin, which are far better candidates for the Content Wiki anyway.


This is still the wisest article - especially the redirect from neutral point of view. NPOV is not a noun describing a state, it only implies a process of detecting neutrality disputes, and it does not define that process in any way. So Consumerium:neutral point of view should redirect to Consumerium:dispute where all the issues and disputes are explained.