Re: NPOV and NOR as a local or a global policies onWikibooks?

> Kathy wrote: ... look at [this page to] 
> discuss [Wiki Media Foundation] naming, 
> branding, etc:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_brand_survey 

I think I see the problem.  Here's a copy of the structure of that survey:

=====
Contents:
- 1 Current projects
- 2 Perception of names
-- 2.1 Do all these project names communicate their intended use? If not, which ones could be improved?
-- 2.2 Do you feel that the current number of unique names is too large, not large enough, or "just right"?
- 3 Logos
-- 3.1 Do all current project logos communicate their intended use? If not, which ones could be improved?
-- 3.2 Should we strive for more consistency in the design of the logos (e.g. Wikimedia colors), or more diversity?
- 4 Licensing
-- 4.1 Should the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia chapters license the project brands to makers of games, gadgets, toys, etc.?
-- 4.2 Should the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia chapters license the project brands to ad-supported mirrors, mobile phone portals, etc.?
- 5 Brand protection
-- 5.1 Should the Wikimedia Foundation attempt to give all its official names an equal level of protection?
-- 5.2 Should the Wikimedia Foundation attempt to protect unofficial local name variants such as "Vikipedio" and "Wikiştiri"?
- 6 Brand strategy
-- 6.1 Should new projects generally be started under a unique name that is not associated with any existing names?
-- 6.2 Would you support or oppose rebranding the projects as "Wikipedia Sources", "Wikipedia Quotes", "Wikipedia Textbooks", and so on?
-- 6.3 Would you support or oppose rebranding the projects as "Wikimedia Sources", "Wikimedia Quotes", "Wikimedia Textbooks", and so on?
-- 6.4 Would you support or oppose rebranding the "Wikimedia Foundation" to "Wikipedia Foundation" in order to reduce Wikimedia/Wikipedia confusion?
-- 6.5 Would you support or oppose rebranding the "Wikimedia Foundation" to an entirely different name in order to reduce Wikimedia/Wikipedia confusion?
-- 6.6 Any other bright renaming ideas?
-- 6.7 Are there other specific changes you would suggest to the current branding?
- 7 Analyse the benefits and costs of doing nothing option
- 8 In which wikis are you active?
- 9 What does a Wiki-X name mean to you?
=====

=8^o  

Simple, no?

It spun my head off.

For a laugh, I cranked it through Microsoft Word 2003's grammar checker (ignoring the misspellings!):

Readability Statistics:

Words 21,572
Characters 109,768
Paragraphs 468
Sentences 1,198

Sentences per Paragraph 20.3
Words per Sentence 14.9
Characters per Word 4.9

Passive Sentences 9%
Flesch Reading Ease 48.8
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 10.0

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch-Kincaid_Readability_Test for reading/grade level number explanation.

... when I have the editing time, I try to rewrite with a 4th grade reading level as my target so that I and my readers have a chance of getting my point in one reading.  We contributors to the above web page require an audience who consistently comprehends at the 10th grade level in order to understand our points in one reading.  Anyone else would require repeated re-reading to understand our points - and who would do that?

I think I see the problem.

Pogo: "We have met the enemy and he is us."
(from a cartoon by Walt Kelly)

- Peter Blaise