It's rather pedantic and irrelevant to the discussion, but Shipman isn't denying anything any more - he's dead.
--sannse
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Richards" marich712000@yahoo.com To: wpmail@pcbartlett.com; "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 5:51 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Viajero/Zero and Lance6 - POV terms
Well, there comes a point where a fact is no longer disputed by any significant number of people. I don't know whether Harold Shipman still denies murder, but, if he admits it, then surely calling him a murderer is justified and NPOV. If he disputes it, then calling him a 'convicted murderer, a charge that he still denies' seems fair. Mark
--- Pete/Pcb21 pete_pcb21_wpmail@pcbartlett.com wrote:
Geoffrey Burling wrote:
[Examples]
*President Bush, alleged cocaine abuser *The CIA allegedly sold drugs in Los Angeles to
fund the Contras in Nicaraugua
*Kenneth Lay, indicted for corporate fraud *Martha Stewart, convicted of insider trading
I think is a solution that would nicely fit with
the rules of NPOV.
I thought that too. Interestingly though UK broadcasting rules are more relaxed about this.
For instance, programmes do not have to say "Harold Shipman, convicted of mass murder,...". They can, and do, say "Mass murderer Harold Shipman...". Once someone has been convicted of X, that person doesn't appear to have recourse if someone calls them an Xer.
Is this a case where WP NPOV exacts a higher standard than supposedly neutral TV news programmes?
Pete
Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l