On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:51 PM, David Levy lifeisunfair@gmail.com wrote:
I see no material distinction preventing us from documenting the matter in a balanced fashion.
The trouble is, the article is overwritten. This is not a phenomenon restricted to this article, it is common in many "political" or "activist" articles, where some editors try to use *every* source out there to write an article several pages long (sometimes in an attempt to avoid arguments about what to include and what not to include, at other times maybe just by being carried away, or simply by not wanting or knowing how to exercise judgment on what to include and when less is more).
I repeat, a shorter article (if done to high standards) would be *just as balanced* and would send the message that this is not a topic that really needs lots written about it. One of the fundamental elements of editorial judgment is to decide what to leave out and how to *summarise* parts of the topic rather than drawing in everything that has been written about the topic.
You see many FA-level articles where the main writer has read numerous sources and made a judgment (based on the proportions of coverage given by the main source) on where and how to summarize. That needs doing here.
Carcharoth