On 9/5/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/09/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
Actually one of the major issues in the dispute is whether BC/AD
violates
NPOV because it requires Wikipedia to make an assertion the Jesus is the Messiah/God. BCE/CE merely describes the condition, and thus does what
the
NPOV policy asks.
That's not an "issue", it's an "assertion". Plus the common assertion that BCE is standard in academia, when that doesn't apply outside the US.
The "assertion" was the major "issue" in the debate. So yes, it's the issue. Leaving aside the people who claimed religious persecution, the major ISSUES in the debate were, on one side, that BC/AD violated NPOV and on the other a mixture of "well so does BCE/CE" or "common usage trumps NPOV". And, as a result, an exception was voted to NPOV.
As to the second argument - did anyone ever provide any evidence to back up the assertion that BCE/CE in academe was a US thing, with non-US academics using BC/AD? I don't recall any evidence provided (ok, I don't recall anyone providing evidence to back up their position except Steve, who provided pages and pages of it)
Ian