From: "Tony Sidaway" minorityreport@bluebottle.com I think you're missing the point somewhat. If I want to represent a point of view on Wikipedia, say something attributable to Fatah, then of course the best source for a reference would probably be http://www.fateh.org/ , and if I want to represent a point of view that I attribute to Mr Sharon I might cite some Israeli government website as my reference. At the same time the text must be NPOV so that it should draw a clear line between reporting a point of view and endorsing it. Similarly, holocaust denial websites are pretty useful for reporting the views of holocaust deniers, and websites avowing that Israelis are nazis are useful for reporting the views of people who believe that Israelis are nazis. One wouldn't use any of the above sites as authorities on the facts of the situation, and indeed where the facts are credibly disputed it would be inappropriate to represent the contentions of any one party to the dispute as wholly factual.
The problem is not when people want to use a Holocaust Denial site to represent the views of Holocaust Deniers; the problem is when they want to use it to represent the "truth" about the Holocaust, or Jews, or Zionism, or Israel. And the latter occurs infinitely more often than the former. And while you or I might not use them as authorities on these subjects, many others view them as the *only* NPOV authorities on these subjects.
Jay.