▲ | Levitz 5 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It's impossible to produce such material with a complete lack of bias, sure. I know of at least of one case in which a person publicly admits he is using Wikipedia to promote their political stances and who is right now at the center of an arbitration case in which he intends to silence opposition. This is not that. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | LastTrain 5 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
People who edit Wikipedia run the gamut from those that are zealous about neutral point of view up to and including people that do it for their own selfish purposes. But lets take the zealous NPOV type. If I were to try and do that, to try my hardest to produce an article which truly takes an NPOV stance, it would still come off biased to you because you and I can't possibly share the same idea about what is neutral. Based on some peoples venom here - including charges of propaganda - I suspect you all are just reading articles written by people with a different worldview than your own. I really don't understand this sense of unfairness or even conspiracy people have about it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|