[WikiEN-l] Re: SPOV threatens NPOV

Tue Dec 13 20:07:03 UTC 2005

On 12/13/05, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Well, obviously Christian literature would say that Christ was
> resurrected. I accepted that, and I asked for other verification.

But Christian literature and Christian beliefs are quite enough!  Why
should anything else be needed?  It is clearly POV to say that
Christians' beliefs are "bunk", however little they conform to
scientific rules.

> Consider this scenario:
>
> The world was considered flat in ancient times. That conformed to
> contemporary rational thinking (basically, the world is flat since we
> can't see it curve). It was also wrong. Is Wikipedia presenting a point
> of view by stating this theory is wrong?

Yes.  Wikipedia should never make statements of fact unless they are
undisputed.  All others should be cited.

--
Sam