Quoting Raphael Wegmann raphael@psi.co.at:
Guy Chapman aka JzG schrieb:
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:41:33 +0100, Raphael Wegmann raphael@psi.co.at wrote:
We won't stop before we get precisely what we want either.
Which is a verifiably neutral encyclopaedia. And that's bad because?....
Well it shows, that you and your opponents share the determination. It would be bad, if determination turns to fanaticism and leads to collateral damage (editors who get blocked, just because they have a different view on what a verifiably neutral encyclopaedia should look like).
But that's isn't what we're talking about. We're not talking about editors who we have disagreements with about whether a given phrasing is neutral, or whether a given source is sufficiently reliable for inclusion. We are talking about people like Bagley who won't be happy as long as Wikipedia contains any criticism of Overstock, and people like Awbrey who wants Wikipedia to be his own personal ground for original research. These people have a different view of what a verifiable neutral encyclopedia would be like. They don't want a verifiable neutral encyclopedia. We should not lose sight of that.