How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

David Gerard-2
In a discussion elsewhere [1], the question of how WIkipedia compares
for neutrality with other encyclopedias came up.

We've been compared with other encyclopedias for accuracy before. Has
anyone ever tried to compare us on neutrality? Or whatever
roughly-synonymous measure doesn't automatically bias the test towards
Wikipedia, which has it as a fundamental content policy.

Compare Britannica. They've never touted themselves as neutral -
they've touted themselves as *authoritative*.[2] The Wikipedia article
on EB notes that EB has been increasingly lauded as less culturally
biased with time, though it occurs to me that's just the sort of
aspect a Wikipedia writer would note.

And how good a proxy for what readers actually want is neutrality? I
think it's excellent, but I could be wrong. Do readers actually just
want to be told?

How would you compare the neutrality of Wikipedia with that of
something else, in a meaningful and useful manner, such that the
framing of the question doesn't necessarily pick the winner before
you've started?


- d.

[1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/5ho/seq_rerun_politics_is_the_mindkiller/422w
[2] Modulo the EB content disclaimer, which makes ours look mild.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

Mike DuPont
Well I can tell you for a fact that the articles about kosovo are not
neutral at all,
mike

On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In a discussion elsewhere [1], the question of how WIkipedia compares
> for neutrality with other encyclopedias came up.
>
> We've been compared with other encyclopedias for accuracy before. Has
> anyone ever tried to compare us on neutrality? Or whatever
> roughly-synonymous measure doesn't automatically bias the test towards
> Wikipedia, which has it as a fundamental content policy.
>
> Compare Britannica. They've never touted themselves as neutral -
> they've touted themselves as *authoritative*.[2] The Wikipedia article
> on EB notes that EB has been increasingly lauded as less culturally
> biased with time, though it occurs to me that's just the sort of
> aspect a Wikipedia writer would note.
>
> And how good a proxy for what readers actually want is neutrality? I
> think it's excellent, but I could be wrong. Do readers actually just
> want to be told?
>
> How would you compare the neutrality of Wikipedia with that of
> something else, in a meaningful and useful manner, such that the
> framing of the question doesn't necessarily pick the winner before
> you've started?
>
>
> - d.
>
> [1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/5ho/seq_rerun_politics_is_the_mindkiller/422w
> [2] Modulo the EB content disclaimer, which makes ours look mild.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
flossk.org flossal.org

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

James Farrar
In your completely neutral opinion, of course.

On 30 April 2011 19:58, Mike  Dupont <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Well I can tell you for a fact that the articles about kosovo are not
> neutral at all,
> mike
>
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> In a discussion elsewhere [1], the question of how WIkipedia compares
>> for neutrality with other encyclopedias came up.
>>
>> We've been compared with other encyclopedias for accuracy before. Has
>> anyone ever tried to compare us on neutrality? Or whatever
>> roughly-synonymous measure doesn't automatically bias the test towards
>> Wikipedia, which has it as a fundamental content policy.
>>
>> Compare Britannica. They've never touted themselves as neutral -
>> they've touted themselves as *authoritative*.[2] The Wikipedia article
>> on EB notes that EB has been increasingly lauded as less culturally
>> biased with time, though it occurs to me that's just the sort of
>> aspect a Wikipedia writer would note.
>>
>> And how good a proxy for what readers actually want is neutrality? I
>> think it's excellent, but I could be wrong. Do readers actually just
>> want to be told?
>>
>> How would you compare the neutrality of Wikipedia with that of
>> something else, in a meaningful and useful manner, such that the
>> framing of the question doesn't necessarily pick the winner before
>> you've started?
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>> [1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/5ho/seq_rerun_politics_is_the_mindkiller/422w
>> [2] Modulo the EB content disclaimer, which makes ours look mild.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> James Michael DuPont
> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
> flossk.org flossal.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

Mike DuPont
Well I would love to provide you very very examples of where I
attempted to fix the problems there.
The wikpedia loves to claim being NPOV but in fact in kosovo there is
a total bent, just compare the de.en,sq and sr wikis via translation,
each of them has its own POV and subscribes to some side.
if you are really interested in this I can tell you more.
mike

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 5:08 PM, James Farrar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In your completely neutral opinion, of course.
>
> On 30 April 2011 19:58, Mike  Dupont <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Well I can tell you for a fact that the articles about kosovo are not
>> neutral at all,
>> mike
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> In a discussion elsewhere [1], the question of how WIkipedia compares
>>> for neutrality with other encyclopedias came up.
>>>
>>> We've been compared with other encyclopedias for accuracy before. Has
>>> anyone ever tried to compare us on neutrality? Or whatever
>>> roughly-synonymous measure doesn't automatically bias the test towards
>>> Wikipedia, which has it as a fundamental content policy.
>>>
>>> Compare Britannica. They've never touted themselves as neutral -
>>> they've touted themselves as *authoritative*.[2] The Wikipedia article
>>> on EB notes that EB has been increasingly lauded as less culturally
>>> biased with time, though it occurs to me that's just the sort of
>>> aspect a Wikipedia writer would note.
>>>
>>> And how good a proxy for what readers actually want is neutrality? I
>>> think it's excellent, but I could be wrong. Do readers actually just
>>> want to be told?
>>>
>>> How would you compare the neutrality of Wikipedia with that of
>>> something else, in a meaningful and useful manner, such that the
>>> framing of the question doesn't necessarily pick the winner before
>>> you've started?
>>>
>>>
>>> - d.
>>>
>>> [1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/5ho/seq_rerun_politics_is_the_mindkiller/422w
>>> [2] Modulo the EB content disclaimer, which makes ours look mild.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> James Michael DuPont
>> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
>> flossk.org flossal.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
flossk.org flossal.org

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

James Farrar
I'm not interested. That's the point. You've been whining about this
on here for months.

On 2 May 2011 18:06, Mike  Dupont <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Well I would love to provide you very very examples of where I
> attempted to fix the problems there.
> The wikpedia loves to claim being NPOV but in fact in kosovo there is
> a total bent, just compare the de.en,sq and sr wikis via translation,
> each of them has its own POV and subscribes to some side.
> if you are really interested in this I can tell you more.
> mike
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 5:08 PM, James Farrar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> In your completely neutral opinion, of course.
>>
>> On 30 April 2011 19:58, Mike  Dupont <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Well I can tell you for a fact that the articles about kosovo are not
>>> neutral at all,
>>> mike
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> In a discussion elsewhere [1], the question of how WIkipedia compares
>>>> for neutrality with other encyclopedias came up.
>>>>
>>>> We've been compared with other encyclopedias for accuracy before. Has
>>>> anyone ever tried to compare us on neutrality? Or whatever
>>>> roughly-synonymous measure doesn't automatically bias the test towards
>>>> Wikipedia, which has it as a fundamental content policy.
>>>>
>>>> Compare Britannica. They've never touted themselves as neutral -
>>>> they've touted themselves as *authoritative*.[2] The Wikipedia article
>>>> on EB notes that EB has been increasingly lauded as less culturally
>>>> biased with time, though it occurs to me that's just the sort of
>>>> aspect a Wikipedia writer would note.
>>>>
>>>> And how good a proxy for what readers actually want is neutrality? I
>>>> think it's excellent, but I could be wrong. Do readers actually just
>>>> want to be told?
>>>>
>>>> How would you compare the neutrality of Wikipedia with that of
>>>> something else, in a meaningful and useful manner, such that the
>>>> framing of the question doesn't necessarily pick the winner before
>>>> you've started?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - d.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://lesswrong.com/lw/5ho/seq_rerun_politics_is_the_mindkiller/422w
>>>> [2] Modulo the EB content disclaimer, which makes ours look mild.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Michael DuPont
>>> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
>>> flossk.org flossal.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> James Michael DuPont
> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
> flossk.org flossal.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by Mike DuPont
> Well I would love to provide you very very examples of where I
> attempted to fix the problems there.
> The wikpedia loves to claim being NPOV but in fact in kosovo there is
> a total bent, just compare the de.en,sq and sr wikis via translation,
> each of them has its own POV and subscribes to some side.
> if you are really interested in this I can tell you more.
> mike
>

But does anybody else do any better? We are on mission impossible sometimes.

Fred


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How does Wikipedia compare for neutrality?

Mike DuPont
Ok, if you are not interested then I wont bother you with it, there
are better things to do.
thanks,
mike

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Fred Bauder <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Well I would love to provide you very very examples of where I
>> attempted to fix the problems there.
>> The wikpedia loves to claim being NPOV but in fact in kosovo there is
>> a total bent, just compare the de.en,sq and sr wikis via translation,
>> each of them has its own POV and subscribes to some side.
>> if you are really interested in this I can tell you more.
>> mike
>>
>
> But does anybody else do any better? We are on mission impossible sometimes.
>
> Fred
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
flossk.org flossal.org

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l