Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Draft (Rewrite proposal)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This Wikipedia page is currently inactive and is retained primarily for historical interest. Per Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines: "A historical page is any proposal for which consensus is unclear, where discussion has died out for whatever reason." If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you should seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
- For guidance on how to make an article conform to the neutral point of view (NPOV), see the NPOV tutorial.
NPOV (Neutral Point Of View) is a fundamental Wikipedia principle which states that all articles must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias. This includes reader-facing templates, categories and portals. According to Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales, NPOV is "absolute and non-negotiable".
Contents |
[edit] The neutral point of view
The neutral point of view is an objective and factual style of writing found in encyclopedias and quality newspapers. In wikipedia, it also serves as an effective means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these are fairly presented, but not asserted. Additionally, it is not asserted that the most common, or some sort of intermediate view is the correct one, readers are left to form their own opinions.
As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view. It is a point of view that is neutral - that is neither critical nor sympathetic of the subject.
Debates are described, represented, and characterized, but not engaged in. Background is provided on who believes what and why, and which view is more common. Detailed articles might also contain the mutual evaluations of each viewpoint, but studiously refrain from assessing their validity. One can think of unbiased writing as the cold, fair, analytical description of debates.
[edit] Bias
- Main articles: Bias, Media bias.
NPOV requires views to be represented without bias. A bias is a prejudice in a general or specific sense, usually in the sense for having a predilection to one particular point of view or ideology. One is said to be biased if one is influenced by one's biases. A bias could, for example, lead one to accept or not-accept the truth of a claim, not because of the strength of the claim itself, but because it does or does not correspond to one's own preconceived ideas.
Types of bias include:
- Ethnic or racial bias, including racism, nationalism and regionalism.
- Corporate bias, including advertising, coverage of political campaigns in such a way as to favor corporate interests, and the reporting of issues to favor the interests of the owners of the news media.
- Class bias, including bias favoring one social class and bias ignoring social or class divisions.
- Political bias, including bias in favor of or against a particular political party or candidate.
- Religious bias, including bias in which one religious viewpoint is given preference over others.
- Sensationalism, which is bias in favor of the exceptional over the ordinary. This includes the practice whereby exceptional news may be overemphasized, distorted or fabricated to boost commercial ratings.
- Geographical bias which may for example describe a dispute as it is conducted in one country without knowing that the dispute is framed differently elsewhere.
[edit] A practical benefit - reducing editorial conflict
Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. Editors represent various social backgrounds, beliefs and influences. Disagreements over competing views, where each view represents a different idea of the truth, are unavoidable. While collaborating, these problems of endless "edit wars" can be minimized by adhering to an objective, factual style of writing, and working positively toward a mutual compromise, at which, eventually, all sides acknowledge their supported views to be fairly represented.
[edit] Achieving balance and diversity
A neutral point of view means articles are neutrally narrated, as in the work of a professional reporter who provides an uncritical, factual observation about some event or issue. Being neutrally narrated does not, however, suggest that the articles themselves are "neutral" - as for representing some collective understanding of truth. This critical distinction must be made, in order to work toward a greater goal of balance and diversity of views.
Balance and diversity means views are selected to represent many different interpretations of the subject, and not just a few narrow observations about it.
Wikipedia does not, however, suppose you, the individual, possess this "magical" ability of seeing a subject from different perspectives. Instead, you are encouraged to work positively with others to achieve this goal, with the understanding that this mutual collaboration will ultimately lead to articles having a broader outlook of the subject.
[edit] Selecting views: measuring significance
In wikipedia, viewpoints are selected and represented in proportion to their relative significance to the understanding of the subject matter, within the encyclopedic context. A viewpoint's significance is determined by the following factors:
- Common acceptance: An encyclopedia is an educational reference source. Articles should deal with established and historical theories and views. (see no original research)
- Authoritativeness of sources: wikipedia deals only with material that have already been published by a reputable publisher. (see verifiability)
- Relevance to the understanding of the subject: views should deal with increasing the understanding of the subject.
[edit] An example
It might help to consider an example of a biased text and how Wikipedians have rendered it at least relatively unbiased.
On the abortion page, early in 2001, some advocates had used the page to exchange barbs, being unable to agree about what arguments should be on the page and how the competing positions should be represented. What was needed — and what was added — was an in-depth discussion of the different positions about the moral and legal aspects of abortion at different times. This discussion of the positions was carefully crafted so as not to favor any one of the positions outlined. This made it easier to organize and understand the arguments surrounding the topic of abortion, which were then presented sympathetically, each with its strengths and weaknesses.
There are numerous other success stories of articles that began life as virtual partisan screeds but were nicely cleaned up by people who concerned themselves with representing all views clearly and sympathetically.
[edit] Another example
Karada offered the following advice in the context of the Saddam Hussein article:
- You won't even need to say he was evil. That's why the article on Hitler does not start with "Hitler was a bad man" — we don't need to, his deeds convict him a thousand times over. We just list the facts of the Holocaust dispassionately, and the voices of the dead cry out afresh in a way that makes name-calling both pointless and unnecessary. Please do the same: list Saddam's crimes, and cite your sources.
[edit] Rewording a potentially biased statement
Sometimes, a potentially biased statement can be reworded to a more NPOV version. For instance, "John Doe is the best baseball player" can be reworded to "John Doe's baseball skills have been praised by many". Even better would be, "John Doe's baseball skills have been praised by baseball insiders such as Al Kaline and Joe Torre", as long as those statements are correct and can be verified. Similarly, "Joe Bloggs has poor habits" can be reworded to "Joe Bloggs has often been criticized for his habits, by observers such as Momar Kadafi and Anwar Saddat."
[edit] POV forks
- Main article: Content forking.
A POV fork is an attempt to evade NPOV guidelines by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. This is generally considered unacceptable. The generally accepted policy is that all facts and majority Point of Views on a certain subject are treated in one article.
[edit] History of NPOV
NPOV is one of the oldest policies on Wikipedia.
- Nupedia's Nonbias policy was drafted by Larry Sanger in spring or summer of 2000.
- Jimbo Wales posted a statement about "neutral point of view" in the early months of Wikipedia. [1] In subsequent versions of the NPOV page, this was known as the original formulation of the NPOV policy.
- A longer version of NPOV was written by Larry Sanger in December, 2001.[this page]
- Larry's draft was moved to this page where upon it went under many edits from a large number of editors.
- In January 2006, an active discussion revealed foundational problems within the formulation of the policy. Extensive modifications were made to improve its clarity and accuracy.
Note: removed, (or planned for replacement with new material) sections are preserved (hidden) in the source for reference.
