All,
I am not traditionally one who posts to this list. I usually watch, read, and watch some more. I do not, typically, edit either, though I will contribute to Talk pages; I simply do not feel my writing skills are up to the task.
However, I am forced to take a stand on this issue, and speak up.
1. I generally am somewhat laid-back when it comes to Wikipedia; I could normally care less. However, as I believe has been recognized, consciously or unconsciously, by the combatants (all of them) in the Middle East articles, WP is becoming, online, a significant source of information.
It is no longer just our plaything, our project. It is a potential part of the information battlespace. The same as TV, as radio, as the newspaper, as paper encyclopedias (which DO have political slants). The same as academic syllabi. The same as any means of disseminating information or opinions. It is no longer just the contributors'...It's a battleground, and will be (heck, probably is already (in far less obvious guises than you may expect)) used as such by communications elements on both sides.
This will not change, and will likely become an issue for other controversial topics as well.
2. That being the case, I've come to the sad conclusion that maybe Wiki should just officially avoid the topic. Stay silent. It'd be sad, but perhaps necessary.
3. On the Jimbo-RK-Danny triangular dispute (including all of the others on all sides)... Cease fire? Agree to disagree. The next time this happens, make it really simple.
Ban both sides. One warning, then down comes Mr. Boot.
4. In terms of audiences: I have to agree with mav here. Wiki-En's primary audience is and must be native English-speakers. That doesn't mean American, European, Indian, Filipino, Martian, Plutonian, or Vulcan. It means people who speak English as their native (and primary) language. Who may well not speak any other language. (In fact, who probably do not. I've found that knowledge of two or more langauges is primarily an attribute only of the intellectual; The average "man-on-the-street" is generally unlikely, anywhere, to speak or understand more than one language. Probably no more than 1 dialect of that 1 language, too.)
Respectfully, John Penta
Also being someone who reads this list without posting much, I was trying for some perspective rather than intending to get involved.
In the abstract, I assumed that WP will always encounter problems in trying to include everything; because writing contemporary history in the making is not only contentious but probably based on sources that are incomplete.
The 'least bad' solution would seem to me to be a 'pendulum arbitration' plus 'cooling-off' period mechanism for edit wars: someone decides which of two versions is less unreasonable, and locks the page for a period of ten days. Here pendulum arbitration comes from labour disputes, where you don't try to find the middle point (which encourages extreme positions) but choose one or other side.
As for the Middle East, I had a look at some pages. The coverage overall seems creditable, but there does seem to be plenty of POV to work on. I looked at some RK edits and wasn't impressed. Even if he's correct on the balance of lack of NPOV (which might be true), I came away disliking his advocacy.
Charles