On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:08:20AM -0400, Wily D wrote:
In the end, what is "Neutral Point of View"? It means writing it so that nobody seriously/plausibly disputes it.
This is my position as well. My point (and I think Phil has made it before me) is that when someone does dispute something, they don't dispute that it is verifiable, they dispute that it is accurate.
One piece of evidence is the {{disputed}} tag, which states:
"The factual accuracy of this article is disputed."
Another piece of evidence is that each of the statements:
"Jesus was resurrected." "Jesus was not resurrected."
_is_ verifiable in numerous reliable sources, but we wouldn't include either sentence as it stands (see a previous message of mine today).
How you figure out what's serious/plausible? I have no idea, but RS comes in handy.
I would argue we do this by consensus, using the talk page to work it out.
- Carl