[WikiEN-l] Re: Christian-Jewish reconciliation.

[Daniel Ehrenberg]

--- "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:
> Perhaps it's not about who's "lost their cool" but
> more about what is
> the best way to write _neutrally_ about a
> controversial subject.
> 
> I've just spent the better part of 2 hours looking
> over the various
> edits and comments. Much of what was reverted looked
> significant
> NPOV-deficient to me.
> 
> Let's try to leave personalities out of this, and
> figure out how to fix
> the article -- or at least come up with a solution
> to the current
> impasse, so the article can be un-protected.
> 
> By the way, would some admin (other than me) please
> add to the top of
> [[Christian-Jewish reconciliation]] the standard
> text about ''the
> neutrality of this page is disputed''? I don't dare
> do it myself,
> because of the guideline about "he who protects a
> page must not edit
> it".
> 
> Ed Poor

IMHO, I think that that is protesting the page anyway.
This is the type of case where it's the spirit of the
law, not the letter. If you think that the neutrality
of the article is disputed, then you can't edit it
(unless we want to change that rule partially).
LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com