15,062
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Biased source material: Amend text.
}}</ref>
While Wikipedia may profess to write from a neutral point of view (NPOV), the use of adamantly pro-circumcision editors and , their selection of so many sources biased in favor of circumcision , and their omission of most of the [[Foreskin#Physiological_functions| functions of the foreskin ]] drags the neutral point over into a pro-circumcision biased position.
The Circumcision article has been amended more than 15,000 times<ref name="circhistory2001" /> so it is an unstable source of information. If Wikipedia truly hopes to have an unbiased article, then Wikipedia needs to start over with a blank page and writers who are non-circumcised, because [[circumcision]] induces [[bias]] in men.<ref name="lebourdais1995">{{REFjournal