[WikiEN-l] Differences between POV forks and legitimate criticism articles

Sun Feb 27 02:35:35 UTC 2005

[[User:Pjacobi]] is on a hunt in the English and German Wikipedia to put
articles of VfD that he thinks are POV forks i.e. all Criticism articles
including [[Criticism of Wikipedia]] that has survived VfD a couple of
weeks ago. Other possible unjustified victims of the hunt are
[[Criticism of Prem Rawat]]. I agree that POV forks should be avoided
but a Criticism article does not have to be a POV fork.

[[User:Pjacobi]] overlooks the fact that there are legitimate criticism
articles. Legitimate criticism articles fulfill the following
conditions. 
1. The main article is too big to contain all points the criticism. The
main article should contains a summary of the criticisms 
2. The criticisms follow normal standards of NPOV, verifiability,
documentation elsewhere etc.
3. The points of criticism are followed by rebuttals that follow the
normal standards
4. The subject is relative to its size so controversial that it warrants
a separate criticism article. For example, the controversial status of
Scientology justifies an article [[Scientology_controversy]]

[[User:Pjacobi]] and I [[user:Andries]] agree that we need guidelines
about what Pjacobi calls "POV forks".

Andries K.D.