This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to tennis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TennisWikipedia:WikiProject TennisTemplate:WikiProject Tennistennis articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Jewish Women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish WomenWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish WomenTemplate:WikiProject Jewish WomenJewish Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's sport (and women in sports), a WikiProject which aims to improve coverage of women in sports on Wikipedia. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Women's sportWikipedia:WikiProject Women's sportTemplate:WikiProject Women's sportWomen's sport articles
This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2020. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
I have added a POV tag because this article repeats Buxton's allegation that her failure to be invited to join Wimbledon was due to anti-Semitism, even though only singles champions are normally invited, and not all of them. There is no evidence except her word for this allegation - which is almost surreal because as already stated, she has no grounds whatsoever to expect honorary membership, because she didn't win the singles title - and she is not a neutral source. Not to mention that no private members club can ever be reasonably expected to invite anyone to be a member that has criticised it in public. That is the way private members clubs work, at least in England - and it would be the same if the disgruntled wannabe member was an Anglican duke. There is no reason to include this silly allegation except as part of a non-neutral political campaign. Wimstead (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The following, which has been in the article for quite a while, is the current version of the paragraph at issue.
No Jewish tennis player was able to claim the exclusive
anti-Semitism is still there. The mere fact that I'm not a member is a full sentence that speaks for itself." Buxton told New York Post reporter Marc Berman that she had been on the "waiting list" since she applied in the 1950s. The Chairman of the Club appeared on television, and when asked about it said that he would have to look into it, and couldn't comment without more information.[2] "I wish it still wasn't such an elite sport," Buxton told Berman. "I wish we could bring it down to a common baseline. It's going that way. It's still not there."[3][4][5] After Gibson and Buxton won the doubles at Wimbledon, one British national newspaper reported their success under the headline, "Minorities Win". "It was in very small type," said Buxton, "lest anyone should see it".[6]
The reason given by the editor for tagging the article as not neutral is the assertion that it violates Wikipedia guidelines on NPOV. I venture that the editor may misunderstand what is called for here by Wikipedia guidelines, which I will discuss below. The paragraph in no way violates, and in fact its inclusion is quite clearly called for by, Wikipedia's NPOV policy.
As Wikipedia states at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, "neutral point of view" is a fundamental Wikimedia principle that means that Wikipedia articles must be written representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources.
Directly on point to the issue here, the guidelines states:
"As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. The elimination of article content cannot be justified under this policy on the grounds that it is "POV". Article content should clearly describe, represent, and characterize disputes within topics, but without endorsement of any particular point of view. Articles should provide background on who believes what and why.... Assert facts, including facts about opinions... By "fact" we mean "a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute." ... When we discuss an opinion, we attribute the opinion to someone and discuss the fact that they have this opinion. For instance, rather than asserting that "The Beatles were the greatest band ever", locate a source such as Rolling Stone magazine and say: "Rolling Stone said that the Beatles were the greatest band ever", and include a reference to the issue in which that statement was made."
(emphasis added)
That is precisely what this paragraph does. And why the addition by Wimstead of the tag suggesting that it does not comport with Wikipedia's NPOV policy is innappropriate.-Epeefleche (talk) 23:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
_(cropped).jpg)
.svg){kind=small}
