Chad Perrin wrote
Tell me if I'm wrong.
I think you're right, in principle, to favour approaches where points of view out of the mainstream are documented in some way, rather than excluded by some sort of decree.
That being said, WP will always want them documented in a certain low-rhetoric, crisp way with supporting cites. This is unlikely to satisfy anybody but the most level-headed, reasonable holders of said points of view.
Acrid contention is to be expected, unless and until one gets 'insidious POV-pushing': people prepared to operate on a time scale of years within the norms and with the general grain of the way WP works. We have ways of ring-fencing some of the contentious issues (not all); we don't currently have much idea about regulating the latter.
Charle