Eclictology wrote:
Taking this one step further -- Neutral writing is often viewed by partisans as seriously biased in favour of the opponents.
That's why interpreting NPOV as the middle ground is a big mistake. On articles such as these, it may be that we can /never/ simply state anything as fact, if even basic facts are disputed. If everything in an article says �X said Y about Z.�, then (assuming that it's undisputed that X did say that) partisans are unlikely to view the article as truly biased. (They may view it as unacceptable wishy-washy, but that's different.) OTOH, if /we/ say something about Z, then add �But X said Y instead.�, then this can easily be viewed as biased against X.
-- Toby