On 04/08/11 5:55 PM, Mike Dupont wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Ray Saintonge<sainto...@telus.net> wrote >> A fork could >> easily start with copied material which from that moment would evolve >> differently. They may choose to abandon NPOV. Having several sites that >> freely and independently do this would in fact put our own NPOV in a >> broader perspective. > What do you think about having multiple consistent points of view on tricky > subjects, on some things, for example my favorite kosovo topic, it is very > very hard to find any neutral point of view and the articles on that subject > are widely separated. Some like the main article are vaguely neutral, and > most of the smaller articles are really not. There are not even any > consistent policing of them or manpower to do it. > I would like to see some way to identify and isolate fragments of things > that are not neutral, but clearly mark on what point of view they represent. > That would allow for a clear separation of the one side, "Kosovo is serbia" > and marking and clearly giving them a say on the matter, and also another > point of view, "Kosovo is free" with equal rights in speaking, at least that > would give a way to manage the discussion. Right now you have a big mess > where the two sides are just mixed up and each side is basically fighting on > wikipedia. > I like the idea, but even there you'll find varying degrees of support for each side with the moderates unable to accept any more extreme views.
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
