User:Michael.C.Wright/On neutrality

“ The great thing about NPOV is that you aren't claiming anything, except to say, "So-and-so argues that ____________, and therefore, ___________." This can be done with a straight face, with no moral compunctions, because you are attributing the claim to someone else. Even in the most contentious debates, when scholars are trying to prove a point, they include counter-arguments, at the least so that they can explain why the counter-arguments fail. ”

Writing for the opponent

Policy

• Wikipedia:Describing_points_of_view (WP:NPOV explanatory supplement)

Each POV should be clearly labeled and described, so readers know:

• Who advocates the point of view
• What their arguments are (supporting evidence, reasoning, etc.)

Pseudoscience

• Wikipedia:Fringe_theories#Spectrum_of_fringe_theories

[T]he task is to represent the majority view as the majority view and the minority (sometimes pseudoscientific) view as the minority view, and to explain how scientists have received or criticized pseudoscientific theories.
— WP:NPOV - Psuedoscience

Essays

• WP:RAISE - Author and publisher both determine quality of a source or citation
• Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_truth#"But_I_know_the_truth!" (Verifiability)

Wikipedia only reports what the reliable sources say; it does not publish what its editors just believe is true.

Templates

• Neutrality templates
• Wikipedia:Template_index/Cleanup#Neutrality_and_factual_accuracy
• Template:POV_statement - {{POV statement|Objection|date=November 2024}}

• Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard

{{subst:NPOVN-notice}} - Notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion

Miscellany

• Wikipedia:Tendentious_editing
• Wikipedia:Wikipedia_abbreviations

Verifiability

All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supportsthe material.

• WP:VERIFY

Notes

References