Ask a Question
or
Create a Poll
  1. Home /
  2. Questions /
  3. Computers
  4. / Internet
  5. / Internet Culture
  6. / Websites
  7. / Websites U-Z
  8. / Wikipedia

by Halskiisaklink on November 14th, 2007

Halskiisaklink

Question

Help answer this question below.

Why do the Wikipedia articles on strikes have a habit of not actually stating what caused the strikes, and tend to mention only what the strikers are doing?

Share:
Other

Answers. 1 helpful answer below.

  • by iwnit on November 14th, 2007

    iwnit

    1) Wikipedia has a neutrality policy, so they would describe facts rather than unproved suppositions.


    2) Have you some examples of this?
    Here the first article that I found about a strike:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_steel_strike
    I think that it contains a broad reflexion about the origin of that strike.


    3) As far as nowadays strikes are concerned, maybe a causal analysis is quite difficult, because it would rather base on the arguments of the striking people or of the companies being striked, so not always neutral.
    Often argument can be only considered as valid sometime afterwards, after some people have made a detailed analysis of the situation.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading Why do the Wikipedia articles on strikes have a habit of not actually stating what caused the strikes, and tend to mention only what the strikers are doing?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads

Related Questions

Professionally Researched

Answerbag

a Demand Media company