I, too, am sick and tired of the acronym "POV" thrown around as an insult.
I doubt we can gather enough steam to deprecate the [[WP:NPOV]] shortcut
but my suggestion for an alternative would be [[WP:NEUTRAL]].
Regards,
Haukur
Just some blue sky thinking:
Our neutral point of view policy has aroused a fair bit of discussion at
[[WP:NPOV]]
recently, and this has got me thinking:
We've all seen arguments where people keep arguing that this is "POV" or
someone
is being "POV" where in normal English we'd just call something an
"opinion" and
note that someone has an opinion on something. Indeed, the made-up term
POV
is bandied around usually to mean something along the lines of - you are
wrong,
I am right, and because it is a NPOV issue, the point is non-negotiable,
which isn't
a very good place to start from if the issue is to be resolved. Plus far
too many
people read NPOV as equating to "no point of view" as opposed to the
real requirement, which is to write from a neutral viewpoint.
My blue sky thinking (which I don't claim to be a panacea, just an
interesting thought) is why don't we rename the policy page
[[Wikipedia:Neutral viewpoint]] and make
the shortcut link to it [[WP:NEUVIEW]] (or [[WP:NEUTVIEW]]). It goes
without
saying that the underlying concept behind the policy would remain
completely
unchanged - just the name of the page would change - plus it would
enhance
people's perceptions that it is about requiring a neutral viewpoint,
rather than no
viewpoint, or neutrality more generally: it would help define the policy
in positive terms
and (and perhaps I'm going too far here:) ) may help stop content
disputes escalating
in scale and viciousness.
Kind regards
Jon
(jguk)
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with
voicemail
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l