Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
It is a requirement on Wikipedia that articles are written from a neutral point of view (NPOV). That is, by not taking a stand yourself, but by faithfully presenting, in the correct proportions and without bias, all significant points of view that are supported in reliable publications. In order to write from a "neutral point of view", a subject must be described from some distance, factually (objectively), whereby the language use may not be colored either.
The "Neutral Position" ("NPOV"), "Verifiability", ("VER") and "No Original Research" ("GOO") pages describe the core principles that Wikipedia content must adhere to. They complement each other and cannot be interpreted separately. Users would do well to familiarize themselves with all of these pages. The principles discussed on these pages can never be set aside, even by consensus.
Explanation of the intended neutral position
In order to achieve a neutral standpoint on Wikipedia, a careful and critical examination of what sort of reliable publications exist on a subject should be taken. Thereafter, the information in those publications should be conveyed to the reader faithfully, in the correct proportions and without distortion. Wikipedia aims to describe disputes (neutral, objective), without taking sides. Users, of course, often have their own point of view or point of view, but should give a complete picture in an article, and not emphasize their own point of view at the expense of other points of view. Wikipedia does not allow certain points of view to be excluded, but instead requires that all points of view that have reasonable support in reliable publications are presented in an article.
A neutral point of view means that material is presented in a factual (objective) way, so that, even if there is a conflict, both proponents and opponents can recognize that it is a real representation of what can be found in the literature. Complete satisfaction is difficult to achieve, but what is worth trying is to find a way of writing that is acceptable to all 'reasonable' persons (regardless of their own, and differing, views).
Opinion as opinion and opinion as fact
The easiest way to get a more encyclopedic description is probably to represent opinions as opinions and attribute them to someone. The fact that someone holds a certain belief, a certain belief, in anything, can in itself be an objective fact (the fact that someone believes this or that). Therefore, these things are relatively easy to describe from a neutral point of view.
Please indicate how much support the different opinions enjoy. Make sure that the representation of the various points of view on a topic adequately reflects the level of support for each point of view, so as not to create the false impression of equality, or the impression that a particular point of view is given more weight than it deserves. For example, the passage "According to Simon Wiesenthal, the Holocaust was a Nazi program to exterminate the Jews, but David Irving disputes this view." suggest an equivalence between two points of view that cannot be found at all in reliable sources.
On the other hand, it is also avoidable to present everything as an opinion. If there is a high degree of agreement on a subject in reliable publications, then a Wikipedia article should simply present the facts as facts, and it is unnecessary, and inconvenient, to attribute them to anyone. (It may be useful to add a reference to a good source.) The wording should also be chosen in such a way that it does not give the impression that the content is controversial.
In the right proportions