On 11/15/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 04:40:12 -0500, "Alec
Conroy"
<alecmconroy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Anyone who showed up accusing of us of
suppressing our
critics would have a giant shiny article we could point to where we
could say "Oh yea?? well what is THAT article doing here then?"
This rather ignores the fact that we have articles on WikiTruth,
Judd Bagley and other prominent critics.
Don't get me wrong-- I'm not saying that at all. I think we do a
GREAT job of it.
I'm just saying-- if we CAN cover ED in a NPOV, Verifiable, NOR way,
we absolutely should. Another feather in the cap, another trophy in
the case-- as indeed, all our articles are.
Having an article because they hate us is no better
than not having
one because they hate us.
From an encyclopedic point of view, 100% agree. The
decion can't be
motivated in any way by "meta-" or wikipolitical
concerns. That, I
think, is part and parcel of NPOV.
But, between you and me, from a meta point of view, if we get to the
point where we CAN have one, that would be extremely impressive of us.
:)
Alec
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l