IMO, taking the interested party has a NPOV, it's fine.
For example, a member of the Democrat Party is an interested part in the
Democratic Party article, should they be able to edit it? Same goes for the
NGS and Wikipedia.
On 5/1/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 30/04/06, Peter Jacobi <peter_jacobi(a)gmx.net> wrote:
If didn't get this wrong, until now even
are welcome, as long as they aim for NPOV -- with the notable
exception of the autobiography clause.
And where does "interested party" start?
There are even topics so obscure ([[New Kadampa Tradition]] comes
to my mind), that only vocal opponents and vocal proponents
contribute. Should they already be considered "interested
parties"? Shall we hope, that they will battle it out so that the
result is NPOV?
A vocal opponent is not an interested party. An interested party is a
party with, well, an interest in the matter, like a shareholder,
employee etc. For Wikipedia purposes, you can pretty much consider
interested party to mean the party itself.
WikiEN-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
[[User:Computerjoe]] on en, fr, de, simple, Meta and Commons.