Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Editors, while naturally having their own points of view, should strive in good faith to provide complete information, and not to promote one particular point of view over another. As such, the neutral point of view does not mean the exclusion of certain points of view, but includes all verifiable points of view which have sufficient due weight ...
A neutral point of view should be achieved by balancing the bias in sources based on the weight of the opinion in reliable sources and not by excluding sources that do not conform to the editor's point of view. This does not mean any biased source must be used; it may well serve an article better to exclude the material altogether.
Especially contentious text can be removed to the talk page if necessary, but only as a last resort, and never just deleted. It is a frequent misunderstanding of the NPOV policy, often expressed by newbies, visitors, and outside critics, that articles must not contain any form of bias, hence their efforts to remove statements they perceive as ...
Sometimes, you will come across a Wikipedia article that seems to have a serious point-of-view problem. It reads as a biased diatribe against the subject of the article. Or perhaps it reads as a biased diatribe in favor of the subject and against critics. Either way, you want it changed.
Common sources of bias include political, financial, religious, philosophical, or other beliefs. Although a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control, a ...
Any material that needs an inline citation but does not have one may be removed. Please immediately remove contentious material about living people (or existing groups) that is unsourced or poorly sourced. For how to write citations, see citing sources. Verifiability, no original research, and neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content ...
Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's beliefs or hypotheses while giving disproportionately less attention to information that contradicts it. [34] The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to ...
Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another proposal is that people show confirmation bias because they are pragmatically ...