Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In choosing words, imagine how a sentence will sound for someone with an opposing POV. In this particular sentence the religion of the quoted person may be used as a neutral fact. Remember, Wikipedia isn't a battleground; there are other places on the Internet to debate a given subject (and it might be appropriate to link to them from the ...
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.
For example, Evolution as fact and theory is a sub-article of Evolution, and Creation–evolution controversy is a sub-article of Creationism. This type of split is permissible only if written from a neutral point of view and must not be an attempt to evade the consensus process at another article.
Used to describe an aspect, the gnomic is considered neutral by not limiting the flow of time to any particular conception (for example, the conceptions of time as continuous, habitual, perfective, etc.). Used to describe a mood, the gnomic is considered neutral by not limiting the expression of words to the speaker's attitude toward them (e.g ...
John you arguing that this statement is not neutral - but how can you honestly say that Creationism is a "more widely accepted scientific model" than evolution. I'm perfectly happy to accept that you think evolution is wrong, but that's not what is being stated.
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 ...
For example, the following would be considered examples of "neutral" word order: [6] ... This last sentence is an example of double hyperbaton, since omnium ...
Articles on Wikipedia must conform to a neutral point of view, being neutral in both content and in form.Editors have had many successes in dealing with non-neutral content, by verifying facts to confirm that they are supported by reliable sources, ensuring that one viewpoint is not given undue weight and removing (or properly attributing) opinions.