Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Neutral point of view page.
|The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic.|
Are you in the right place?For questions or discussions about the application of this policy to any specific article(s), please post your message at either the NPOV Noticeboard (any neutrality-related issue) or the Fringe Theories Noticeboard (undue weight given to a minority view).
|WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia|
Note: Edit history of 001-017 is in 017.
Threads older than 30 days may be archived by .
Changes to the religion section?
"Wikipedia articles on history and religion draw from a religion's sacred texts as well as from modern archaeological, historical, and scientific sources." - ONLY articles on religion should be drawn from sacred texts. For articles on history, sacred texts should either not be considered, or be included as historical sources with suitable justification for its inclusion as such a source.SecC (talk) 17:52, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
"Some adherents of a religion might object to a critical historical treatment of their own faith because in their view such analysis discriminates against their religious beliefs." - If this is the case, it should be ignored. These adherents are absolutely incorrect as they have no reason to believe that such treatment "discriminates" against their religious beliefs. A historical treatment by definition involves no bias.
- Mostly Oppose - Context matters. Religious belief has been an important factor throughout history... indeed understanding religious beliefs is often crucial to understanding why events played out as they did. Thus, to give a complete account of events, it may be necessary to refer to sacred texts. For example, an article about the archaic Kingdom of Israel really does need to mention what the Bible says about it... and compare and contrast that to what archeologists and historians say. To restrict references to sacred texts to ONLY articles on religion is overkill. The key is that when discussing what sacred texts say, we present the information with attribution and phrase things in proper context. Blueboar (talk) 12:13, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Overall reception in album ratings boxes and NPOV/Due
Input is appreciated here - Please see this discussion on how NPOV affects the selection of 10 album ratings in an album ratings box for critical reception sections, considering the overall reception of an album (negative, mixed or positive). Lapadite (talk) 06:37, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
New RfC that concerns NPOV policy
A new RfC has started that concerns if an old sentence at WP:NPOV_dispute accurately reflects NPOV policy, please see Wikipedia talk:NPOV dispute#RfC: POV Pushing On Talk Pages -Obsidi (talk) 14:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)