Sam Korn wrote: > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:36 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2009/4/5 Oskar Sigvardsson <oskarsigvards...@gmail.com> >>> I think it's very clear that wikipedia has developed a very successful >>> model, not least because many other wikis seem to almost automatically >>> adopt our style and policies. In short: Wikipedia Works. >>> >> NPOV is our key innovation. Much more radical than letting anyone edit >> the website. >> > I agree. The only way a wiki that says "anyone can edit" can work is > with NPOV. You can either enforce a POV by banning people who don't > share your point of view, or you can explicitly endorse *no-one's* > point of view. >
An enforced POV cannot really be neutral. > (Similarly, NPOV would be extremely difficult to manage with a small > base of users as discussion (and, to some extent, conflict) is > essential.) > > Not really, in a paradoxical way. Many rarely visited articles on non-controversial subjects already achieve that neutrality. An unchallenged article written by a single person is neutral at the moment it is written, and remains so until challenged. If the content is outrageous that neutrality will seldom last more than a few minutes. Ec _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l