Wikipedia: evaluating Neutral Point of View

1
Wikipedia evaluating Neutral Point of View

• An evaluation of neutral point of view as
  presented through book reviews

2
The 5 Pillars

• All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic
  content must be written from a neutral point of
  view, representing all significant views fairly,
  proportionately and without bias
• Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
• Wikipedia has a neutral point of view,
• Wikipedia is free content
• Wikipedia has a code of conduct
• Wikipedia does not have firm rules

3

• Sometimes this requires representing multiple
  points of view presenting each point of view
  accurately providing context for any given point
  of view, so that readers understand whose view
  the point represents

4

• Initial aim To test main defining
  characteristics of Wikipedia by finding a topic
  of particular controversy, conducting my own
  research, and submitting my expansion to
  Wikipedia as a possible source of reliable and
  neutral information

5
Kenneth R. Miller

• Kenneth R. Miller (born 1948) is a Biology
  Professor at Brown University
• Miller received his P.h.D from the University of
  Colorado in 1974, and his main research focuses
  on problems concerning structure and function in
  biological membranes, with the use of electron
  microscopy.

6

• New approach to dispute between religions and
  science
• Entails supportive coexisting of religion and
  science founded on principle that evolution
  serves to strengthen the existence of an ultimate
  being
• Millers method is to take us step by step
  supporting both creationism and evolution,
  addressing weaknesses and strengths of both sides
  to reach a conclusion on their supportive
  co-existence

7
Link to wikipedia book reviews

• http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finding_Darwin27s_Go
  d

8
Some questions I encountered beginning my
project

• How does wikipedia fulfill the pillar of
  achieving a neutral point of view with book
  reviews? Is this approach unique to book reviews?
  And if so, is it more or less effective than the
  method demonstrated by other wikipedia articles?

9
New objective

• To prove, through an evaluation of each review
  provided for the novel in comparison with the
  book itself, whether the accumulated view points
  represented in the reviews are able to fulfill
  the pillar of neutrality

10
Methodology

• Read novel, Finding Darwins God
• Read book reviews supplied by wikipedia and
  evaluate the neutrality/accuracy of their content
  as compared to the novel.
• Discern whether or not the reviews result in an
  accumulated neutral representation point of view.
• Is this method effective?
• Compile own review of the novel and post it onto
  wikipedia to evaluate screening process with
  reviews.

11
Young Earth Creationist POV

• Finding An Evolutionist's God by Henry M. Morris
  (young earth creationist POV)
• picks and chooses what to present those wanting
  an accurate book review who have yet to read the
  book will get a highly skewed summary of the
  novels actual contents
• review is subjective does represent rightly main
  creationist views due to the fact that Henry
  Morris is known as the intellectual father of
  creation science
• Therefore, we receive a direct and informative
  portrayal of creationism, but in doing so we are
  given an inaccurate portrayal of the novel, which
  should be the main goal of an objective book
  review

12
Theistic POV

• http//www.energion.com/about.shtml
• homepage for the study and understanding of the
  Christian religion.
• Neufields process indicative of the books
  actual contents he demonstrates accurately the
  structure of each chapter and explains Millers
  main points
• Very objective

13
Realizations reached throughout process

• If each review written by a reputable/legitimate
  authority on that subject (agnostic, YEC,
  atheist) then the point of view will be a direct
  representation of those views
• Thus all together, accumulated reviews should in
  theory provide a neutral POV since according to
  Wikipedia, neutrality consists of representation
  of all significant viewpoints

14

• Introduces concept of sacrificing immediate
  neutrality for eventual neutral POV.
• Providing a compilation of individual reviews
  easier than encapsulating all views equally into
  one article possibly more effective because
  not as confusing creates clear cut line defining
  what each groups perspectives are and from there
  allows reader to make own decision
• book reviews are un-editable unlike the
  articles therefore reviews are left raw and
  unchanged strictly a representation of the
  reviewers beliefs.

15
Limitations

• What if reviews supplied are not representative
  of all view points? Reviewers submit reviews that
  all represent the same points of view will
  result in overall biased point of view.
• May result in accurate portrayal of the reviewers
  practiced religions, though may not accurately
  portray an actual review of the novel.
• Who supplies the labels?

16
Conclusion

• All in all, pillar of neutrality is fulfilled
  through Wikipedias method of eventual neutrality
  through accretion.
• Just as long as the reviews supplied do not
  bend towards a certain point of view only