Wikiquote:Neutral point of view/Draft
From Wikiquote
 |
This page is a revision draft of an existing Wikiquote policy. This policy has been identified by WikiProject Policy Revision as a policy requiring revision. While this policy may be in force at the present time as written, it is currently undergoing a community effort to bring it more fully into line with the needs of Wikiquote. Do not quote any text on this page as policy! It is only a draft! Please see Wikiquote:WikiProject Policy Revision for further information on the ongoing effort to revise Wikiquote policy. |
| Wikiquote Policies and Guidelines |
|---|
| Article standards |
| Working with others |
Wikiquote has a strict neutral point of view (NPOV) policy, which basically states that its mission is best served not by advancing or detracting particular points of view on any given subject, but by trying to present a fair, neutral description of the facts, among which are the facts that various interpretations and points of view exist. (Of course, there are limits to which points of view are worth mentioning, and this can be an area of conflict.) This policy exists on all Wikimedia projects.
"Neutral point of view" should not be confused with "point of view espoused by an international body such as the United Nations"; writing in NPOV style requires recognising that even widely held or widely respected points of view are not necessarily all-encompassing.
While NPOV is an ultimate goal in writing a Wikiquote article, it's difficult to achieve immediately as a single writer, and is thus sometimes regarded as an iterative process (as is wiki writing in general), by which opposing viewpoints compromise on language and presentation to produce a neutral description acceptable to all.
This might be viewed as an adversarial system, but hopefully a polite one. One is expected to approximate NPOV to the best of one's ability and welcome improvements brought by others in good faith; a failure of the system can become an edit war, in which two or more parties dig in and refuse to compromise, instead reverting each other's changes outright.
Contents |
[edit] The original formulation of NPOV
A general purpose encyclopedia is a collection of synthesized knowledge presented from a neutral point of view. To whatever extent possible, encyclopedic writing should steer clear of taking any particular stance other than the stance of the neutral point of view.
The neutral point of view attempts to present ideas and facts in such a fashion that both supporters and opponents can agree. Of course, 100% agreement is not possible; there are ideologues in the world who will not concede to any presentation other than a forceful statement of their own point of view. We can only seek a type of writing that is agreeable to essentially rational people who may differ on particular points.
Some examples may help to drive home the point I am trying to make:
- An encyclopedic article should not argue that corporations are criminals, even if the author believes it to be so. It should instead present the fact that some people believe it, and what their reasons are, and then as well it should present what the other side says.
- An encyclopedia article should not argue that laissez-faire capitalism is the best social system. [...] It should instead present the arguments of the advocates of that point of view, and the arguments of the people who disagree with that point of view.
Perhaps the easiest way to make your writing more encyclopedic is to write about what people believe, rather than what is so. If this strikes you as somehow subjectivist or collectivist or imperialist, then ask me about it, because I think that you are just mistaken. What people believe is a matter of objective fact, and we can present that quite easily from the neutral point of view.
-
- Jimbo Wales, Wikimedia founder
[edit] NPOV on Wikiquote
Since Wikiquote is a collection of quotations, NPOV writing is less frequently required. This does not mean that NPOV is any less an official policy, or that it does not apply on Wikiquote. Quotations included in Wikiquote do not need to conform to NPOV, as they are reflections of the point-of-view of the quoted individual; however, the selection and presentation of quotes, as well as all non-quote text on Wikiquote (excluding userpages and with limitations in the Wikiquote namespace) should conform to NPOV. This includes intro text on quote pages, templates intended for the main namespace (they should not express preference for or against any view, etc.), and where relevant, the contents of the Wikiquote namespace.
[edit] Selection of quotes
For subjects where multiple viewpoints or schools of thought exist, the selection of quotes should adequately represent all of the major views, regardless of whether you personally agree with them or not. This means that editors should not remove quotes from an article simply because it expresses a viewpoint they do not agree with. Similarly, editors should not add quotes to a page simply because they agree with the sentiment. Quotes should be clearly relevant to the subject, and should not overrepresent a particular point of view.
Quotes should be selected because they are relevant to the subject; they should not be chosen to embarass or misrepresent a person or a point of view.
[edit] Presentation of quotes
Often, the manner in which a quote is presented has a large bearing on how it is understood. It is all to easy to take a single sentence or phrase out of context, where it will then seem to apply to a point of view completely unintended, perhaps even the opposite of what was intended, by its speaker. Quotes should be included with enough context, either from the section in which they are placed, or from more extensive quoting from the same source, to make clear their original meaning and application to the subject.
