Gutza wrote:
You can definitely add that to the page, we're people, not computers, it's obvious that'd be a good faith edit. My 2c, of course, but I highly doubt anyone would mind.
Gutza
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
Perhaps it's not about who's "lost their cool" but more about what is the best way to write _neutrally_ about a controversial subject.
I've just spent the better part of 2 hours looking over the various edits and comments. Much of what was reverted looked significant NPOV-deficient to me.
Let's try to leave personalities out of this, and figure out how to fix the article -- or at least come up with a solution to the current impasse, so the article can be un-protected.
By the way, would some admin (other than me) please add to the top of [[Christian-Jewish reconciliation]] the standard text about ''the neutrality of this page is disputed''? I don't dare do it myself, because of the guideline about "he who protects a page must not edit it".
Adding such a notice wihout otherwise changing the text is really more meta-editorial than editorial, but when sensitivities are running high I can appreciate the wisdom of having soneone else to it.
Ec