Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Inherently, because of this, most articles on Wikipedia are full of POVs. An article which clearly, accurately, and fairly describes all the major, verifiable points of view will – by definition – be in accordance with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Each POV should be clearly labeled and described, so readers know: Who advocates the point of view
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved. Peer review of this article about a famous painting
Thus, for instance, an article written from an American point of view may judge that the European fondness for welfare state solutions is misguided, or express this point of view in oblique ways; the same could be true of an article written from a European point of view on justice and firearms in the United States. Writers should thus combat ...
Some articles by definition, express a point of view, in which case I propose that a neutral point of view (NPOV), has a slightly different meaning as follows: . For a general article: (existing policy) Neutral Point of View means as described in policy, and loosely means to (a) provide a balanced article in (b) a neutral manner.
Articles should not be written from a first- or second-person perspective. In prose writing, the first-person (I/me/my and we/us/our) point of view and second-person (you and your) point of view typically evoke a strong narrator. While this is acceptable in works of fiction and in monographs, it is unsuitable in an encyclopedia, where the ...
Because the neutral point of view policy is often unfamiliar to newcomers yet central to Wikipedia's approach, many issues surrounding the neutrality policy have been covered extensively before. If you have some new contribution(s) to make to the debate, you could try Talk:Neutral point of view, or bring it up on the Wikipedia mailing list ...
This is a stab at creating an example section to help distinguish neutral vs non-neutral writing. I created it because the actual "Neutral Point of View" page now has an awful lot of commentary on it and it is getting difficult to get much guidance. I have tried to glean my examples on the basis of the majority opinion on that page.
The review should not be influenced by beliefs about how the article could be made "perfect", by how the reviewer would have written the article, or by personal feelings about the article topic. [2] Reviewers should aim to advise on content and form rather than to impose their preferences.