[WikiEN-l] Re: Categories and NPOV

[Nathan J. Yoder]

> As truly informative (and useful in arguments) as it is, isn't
> [[Category:Logical fallacies]] a little non-NPOV too, if people use them 
> everyday, and believe in their truth?

If they aren't NPOV, you can correct them.  There are generic examples
you can make that convey the point clearly without treading on any
ground that would involve something like mocking a religion
indirectly.

I haven't reviewed the logical fallacies category extensively, but
from what I've seen, they've identified legitimate logical fallacies,
ones that are widely recognized in literature about logical fallacies.
 Now I think a lot of the articles are poorly written, but they are
 generally on the mark about the logical fallacies.

If you could provide specific examples of what you consider POV within
a logical fallacy article, I'd like to see them.

----------------------------------------------
Nathan J. Yoder
http://www.gummibears.nu/
http://www.gummibears.nu/files/njyoder_pgp.key
----------------------------------------------