Re:Wikipedia is getting a new look
by bosswipe on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @03:47PM
(#24571097)
I don't understand Larry Sanger's complaint about NPOV. If a neutral encyclopedia was required to list all minority points of view on every topic then nothing would be knowable. It wouldn't be able to say that the earth is round. If saying that the earth is round is biased then neutrality is worthless and not worth pursuing.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
In even simpler terms, the use of editorial judgment is required to write an encyclopedia. Always has been, always will be. A website free of editorial judgment looks like 8chan, not an encyclopedia.
Even 8chan had some level of editorial judgement, however small it was. It was there.
The Admin has been very active in preserving QAnon's presence on the board. Potentially to the point of hijacking the QAnon tripcodes.
Well, i dare say, that would be an example of an editorial judgement. Agreeable or not.
Re:Wikipedia is getting a new look
by TuringTest on Thursday September 24, 2020 @04:17AM
(#24576483)
The original statement of NPOV was to at least mention any significant view supported by a significant minority of experts or people involved; not EVERY topic. It makes sense that, if you want the encyclopedia to be a starting point for investigating a subject, it informs you of the existence of significant non-sanctioned views.
In practice, this need is usually satisfied by the Talk pages and archives. The published article is sanitized, but if you really want to learn about the controversies in the topic, your best choice is to dig deep in the discussions that resulted in the controversy being excised from the visible version. It's quite rare that the talk pages are also purged as well.
Re:Wikipedia is getting a new look
by Noumenon72 on Wednesday September 30, 2020 @08:30PM
(#24645855)
When I've been to the talk pages they were populated by even-less-neutral discussion about how to expunge anything that might offer support to people who believed the right-wing position.