"විකිපීඩියා:NPOV" හි සංශෝධන අතර වෙනස්කම්

 

==Achieving neutrality==

===Article naming===

A Wikipedia article must have one definitive name.<ref>Note, however, that [[WP:Redirect|redirects]] may be used to address this technical limitation in situations where non-controversial synonyms and variations in word morphology exist.</ref> The general restriction against ''POV forks'' applies to article names as well. If a genuine naming controversy exists, and is relevant to the subject matter of the article, the controversy should be covered in the article text and substantiated with reliable sources. Otherwise, alternative article names should not be used as means of settling POV disputes among Wikipedia contributors. Also disfavored are double or "segmented" article names, in the form of: ''Flat Earth/Round Earth''; or ''Flat Earth (Round Earth).''<ref>(See also: [[Wikipedia:Naming_conflict#How_to_make_a_choice_among_controversial_names|Choosing among controversial names]], [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)|Choosing geographic names]], [[Wikipedia:Naming conflict]], [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions]]).

</ref> Even if a synthesis can be found, like ''Shape of the Earth'', or ''Earth (Debated shapes)'', it may not be appropriate, especially if it is a novel usage coined specifically to resolve a POV fork.

 

===Article structure===

Sometimes the internal structure of an article may require additional attention to protect neutrality and avoid problems like ''POV forks'' and ''undue weight''. Although specific article structures are not as a rule prohibited, in some cases the article structure itself may need attention. Care must be taken to ensure the overall presentation is broadly neutral.

 

 

===POV forks===

A ''POV fork'' is an attempt to evade NPOV policy by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. This is generally considered unacceptable. The generally accepted policy is that all facts and major Points of View on a certain subject are treated in one article.

 

* ''[[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ#There's no such thing as objectivity|There's no such thing as objectivity]]''<br />Everybody with any philosophical sophistication knows that. So how can we take the "neutrality" policy seriously?

 

 

* ''[[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ#Making necessary assumptions|Making necessary assumptions]]''<br />What about the case where, in order to write any of a long series of articles on some general subject, we must make some controversial assumptions? That's the case, e.g., in writing about evolution. Surely we won't have to hash out the evolution-vs.-creationism debate on every such page?