See
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/ William_M._Connolley&diff=9512576&oldid=9512379
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/ William_M._Connolley&oldid=9512805
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Pseudoscience
Fred
The statement of On Dec 12, 2005, at 12:20 PM, stevertigo wrote:
Something else to talk about:
Some of our rather intelligent sciency people seem to have an unusual inability to distinguish science from neutrality. Ultimately, they tend to argue that articles should hold a defacto deference to what is essentially a Scientific Point of View, rather than a Neutral Point of View.
How best to single these people out and correct their behaviour? Any examples of articles in question? Isnt the term "pseudoscience" a POV pejorative from the SPOV?
Stevertigo
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l