User:Vassyana/insanity/Neutral point of view x02
 | This page in a nutshell: All Wikipedia content uses a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly and proportionately. |
The neutral point of view (NPOV) represents fairly and without bias all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. The neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. Wikipedia does not pass judgment on the subjects of its articles. Debates within topics are clearly represented and characterized, background is provided on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular. Allow readers to form their own opinions.
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. The others are Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability. They should be interpreted in context with one another.
Achieving neutrality
[edit]Fairness of tone
[edit]Characterize disputes neutrally by presenting competing views with fairness and some detachment. Articles can end up as partisan commentary even while presenting both points of view. Even when a topic is presented with verifiable facts, an article can still have an implied stance through either selection of which facts to present and how they're presented.
Due weight
[edit]Represent significant viewpoints in proportion to their prominence. Articles that compare views should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and will usually not include tiny-minority views at all. Minority views can receive better attention on pages specifically devoted to them.
Using sources
[edit]Attribute an opinion to someone and discuss the fact that they have an opinion, and substantiate disputed facts. As an example: That The Beatles were a great band is an opinion. A study showing that most people in Liverpool believe the Beatles were the greatest band is an attributable fact. "The Beatles were amazing" is an opinion; that they often made the UK Singles Chart is a substantiated fact.
Other resources
[edit]- NPOV FAQ
- NPOV tutorial
- NPOV examples and the examples debate
- Guidelines for controversial articles
- Words to avoid, weasel words and peacock terms
- List of controversial issues
- Understand Bias
- Meta:Positive tone
- Talk:Creationism and Larry's Big Reply
- Wikipedia Neutrality Project
External links
[edit]- NeutralPointOfView on Meatballwiki
- Multiple points of view: see religion-wiki: Multiple points of view