User talk:Kaustuv/policy tree

This is with regard to Wikipedia talk:German page approval solution#This idea fails the Siegenthaler test

However, I will most definitely disagree with your claim that V is superior to NPOV. It is superior to NOR, if by "superior" we are refering to a superior as in class heirarchy. All Original Research will be fail Verifiability, but not vice versa as one can post unverified information which is not original research. As such, NOR can be considered a sub-policy of V.

However, NPOV is the defining policy of Wikipedia, as opposed to wikinfo's Sympathetic POV and other similar projects, and is in fact superior to V. This is because the inclusion of unverified information in an article inherently violates NPOV, as it gives undue weight to a specific view. Thus anything which fails Verifiability will fail Neutral Point of View, but not vice versa as one can violate NPOV using information which passes V, and Verifiability is a sub-policy of Neutral Point of View. Simple category heirarchy. --tjstrf 05:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but this is really the most minor point in my message. We can discuss this elsewhere, as it isn't directly relevant to my concern above, and I don't wish to divert this thread down the path of debating which policy subsumes which. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 06:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I realize it was a minor point in this particular statement, but it's a widespread misunderstanding, with people thinking that they are seperate policies, and can be applied piecemeal, when they are in fact a policy tree of NPOV. --tjstrf 07:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Forgive me for refactoring this out of that page, but it was an expression of personal belief. I hold verifiability in higher regard than neutrality. I am not eager to accept your claim that this is a "widespread misunderstanding". — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 10:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)