On 27 June 2010 06:47, Elias Friedman
<elipongo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You're proposing to overturn the rules
against POV forking? Seems like
a bad idea to me - the encyclopedia would shatter into an unnavigable
mess if every interest group were to split off their own versions of
articles.
I think there's a valid issue here, but there's a balance to be struck between:
* X as it occurs in one specific context
* X from the perspective of one viewpoint
So it would be legitimate to have an article on [[Economic
philosophies of the Something Party]] and one on [[Economic
philosophies of the Other Party]]; it would not be legitimate to have
an article on [[Economics (Somethingian)]] as a counter to [[Economics
(Otherian)]].
Where you draw the line, though, is quite tricky...
It's not so tricky to say that (a) NPOV is never negotiable in an
article, and (b) a POV content fork is not a distinction between topics,
but a way of spreading out content according to editorial view. We have
never accepted that POV content forks have a place in WP. (They have a
very large place elsewhere, which is a good reason to stick to our guns
on this.)
Charles