[WikiEN-l] Our credibility is questioned

[Jimmy Wales]

libertarian wrote:
> I too was under the impression that the aim of Wikipedia was to 
> present things in an encyclopediac fashion.

It is!

> However, when Wikipedia allows allegations ragrding verifiable events
> (especially the allegations of political oppnents) to be posted as 
> a legitimate point of view, the credibility of Wikipedia takes a
> beating.

What do you mean about 'allows'?  If you see a problem, edit it.

> In particular, I've been having problems regarding contributions I've
> made on India. I've tried to stick to verifiable facts and present
> things in an encyclopedic manner, but there seem to be 3 members
> who keep watch on what I'm posting and revert it to their version
> which carries nothing but what can be classified as propaganda of
> the Communist Party of India(Marxist). These people add allegations
> by this party as a part of an article. 

Can you give an exact reference, including references to diffs of
reversions?

> In any case, I accepted the claim that if an issue has N 
> views, all N views are represented on Wikipedia.
> However, when I posted a point of view they didn't like, it was 
> removed by them!

I have not looked at your edits, but one key that you should keep in
mind of course is that in case of controversy, Wikipedia should not
assert multiple points of view, but merely describe those points of
view.

It sounds like you do understand that, so perhaps if you can give us
some specific references to review, that would be helpful.

--Jimbo