My comments were only about theory. I haven't ever looked at the article in question.

On 12/7/06, David Boothroyd david@election.demon.co.uk wrote:

No new posts, so I'm taking the liberty of summing up.

At one end of the spectrum Charles Matthews doesn't see the need for mentioning the blog in the text of the article. However, if I discern his views correctly, he sees it as insignificant rather than violating policy. His was the only voice against including the blog in the text.

Guy Chapman accepts inclusion in the text, but objects to the link on grounds of WP:EL and WP:BLP.

Supporting linking are myself, Ryan Wetherell, Luna, The Cunctator, and Steve Bennett from the list. In addition two recent editors to the article, Catchpole and The Golux, have either put the blog link back in or commented in favour of it. (In fairness, Jossi has also removed the link citing WP:EL and WP:BLP)

Although Charles Matthews argued against the significance, he did accept that linking to partisan sources was possible providing there was "a 'shield' of NPOV" in the article.

I sum this up as consensus in favour of including the mention in the text, and including the link. -- David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk david@election.demon.co.uk (home) dboothroyd@westminster.gov.uk (council) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l