On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Here's the NPPA Code of ethics:
1. Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.
2. Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.
3. Be complete and provide context when photographing or
David Gerard wrote:
2009/4/22 Milos Rancic
And if you want to force any kind of neutrality there, you would get
the same kind of scientific production which existed in East European
countries during 50s and 60s: A (very good) book about ancient Greek
literature starts with 20-30 pages of
I'm not sure what the answer is, and I agree with you that it's not easily
resolved, but it seems to me that some sort of neutrality policy ought to
apply to Commons.
In my opinion the universal form of the NPOV policy is simple - be honest.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Mike.lifeguard
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
Scientific? Is there something scientific about neutral point of view as
a framework for Wikipedia, even? It has some similarities to the
scientific method, I suppose, but I'm not sure that's what we imagine
ourselves
Hallo Brianna,
NPOV is mainly a principle of Wikipedia, later also used by Wikibooks
and Wikinews. There is at least one project (Wikiversity) which
explicitely allow participants not to follow NPOV, but the Disclosure of
Point of Views in Wikiversity follow in principle the ideal of NPOV: It
2009/4/22 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
NPOV is mainly a principle of Wikipedia, later also used by Wikibooks
and Wikinews. There is at least one project (Wikiversity) which
explicitely allow participants not to follow NPOV, but the Disclosure of
Point of Views in Wikiversity follow in
2009/4/22 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
NPOV transformation to general neutrality will work in the most of the
cases. A clear example for such transformation is Wikinews. Even
called as NPOV, Wikinews neutrality is a different kind of approach
because it is a journalistic one.
And even
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:32 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the point is to have whatever would be the locally relevant
version of neutrality. On Wikipedia it's NPOV. On Commons or
Wikisource, I expect it would be neutrality of subject matter. Etc.
The key point would be
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
And if you want to force any kind of neutrality there, you would get
the same kind of scientific production which existed in East European
countries during 50s and 60s: A (very good) book about ancient Greek
literature
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Brianna Laugher
brianna.laug...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/21 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
The Wikimedia Foundation takes this opportunity to reiterate some core
principles related
2009/4/22 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
And if you want to force any kind of neutrality there, you would get
the same kind of scientific production which existed in East European
countries during 50s and 60s: A (very
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de wrote:
From: Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] NPOV as common value? (was Re: Board statement
regarding biographies of living people)
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date
Hoi,
There is a difference between the way photo journalists work and the way
most of the illustrations come to Commons. The NPPA code of ethics are
clearly written for active press journalists. They get paid for what they
do. Also the NPPA is a USA national entity and consequently their rules do
I would love to see these adopted for Commons photographers. The issue
will become knowing when these principles are being violated. For
example, if you're going to alter audio to serve your own POV, you're
not going to make it obvious you've done so. Detection is one problem,
but even if you've
Michael Snow, 22/04/2009 06:52:
For example, in Wikiquote, I think an expression of neutral point of
view would be to focus on the question of what is actually quotable.
Read more here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view_on_Wikiquote
Regrettably, en.wikiquote does not have
Nemo_bis, 22/04/2009 23:49:
this NPOV policy has been really useful on it.wikiquote.
I forgot to mention that we have also policies on original research
(http://it.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:NRO) and notability
(http://it.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Wikiquote#Significativit.C3.A0):
it was very
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
Some of the NPOV-related problems may be solved by talking about
context. If we say that a single piece of art (or propaganda or
whatever) is not a context, then problems related to Commons are
solved.
Yes. Context is
2009/4/22 Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com:
Science is not yet neutral. The 'scientific method' we currently use
as a meterstick is a fairly casual method, often producing biased or
context-free results, which would be improved by a bit of the same
self-reflection required to describe
Brianna Laugher wrote:
Hi,
I think the Board's statement is quite commendable if unremarkable
(which is I guess part of the reason for the silence - nothing new,
which is as it should be!). Only one comment actually surprised me.
2009/4/21 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
The
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net wrote:
Brianna Laugher wrote:
Hi,
I think the Board's statement is quite commendable if unremarkable
(which is I guess part of the reason for the silence - nothing new,
which is as it should be!). Only one comment actually
20 matches
Mail list logo
