On 10/27/05, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I've deleted the scabrous template
[[Template:Twoversions]] as a
blatant encouragement to violate NPOV and substitute Sympathetic Point
Of View. It was voted "keep" on TFD, which is complete rubbish
because eight people can't vote to violate NPOV on Wikipedia.
Currently protected blank.
Voting is not only Evil, it's Stupid. Think, dammit.
I disagree with this; in my experience twoversions has been useful in
providing transparency to the nature of a dispute over two distinct
versions of an article. Differences of opinion over which version is
more neutral are legitimate--balance is about judgement, not a black
and white issue. There may also be differences over other issues,
such as style. Most recently I used twoversions when an article
rewrite was opposed. The dispute was over whether the correct
definition of the subject of the article was being used.