No one's responded to me about why NPOV shouldn't be followed in adding to the caption the quote from the image's source (Zombie of Zombietime.com) "Zombie of Zombietime.com describes this poster as, "the most anti-Semitic sign ever seen at any protest rally in the United States." I've just been presented with straw man arguments. I've got no problem with the image but what I do have a problem with is when an image is presented outside of neutral point of view.
-Scott [[User:Netscott]]
On 8/24/06, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
As the article Talk: page has made quite clear, some people look at the image and think it is a clear example of anti-Semitism, others look at it and think it's anti-Zionism. The article discusses at length the debate over whether some (or all) anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism - indeed, to a degree, that is what the whole article is about. Thus, again, as has been explained, the arguably ambiguous nature of the image is a perfect example of the topic of the article itself.
Something about this image bothers Netscott, and he has tried to modify, explain, remove, etc. this image on various grounds. He keeps claiming it violates policy; yet when asked to explain what policy he thinks it violates, he keeps making vague (and changing) references to various policies, but refuses to actually quote the specific section of policy he thinks this violates. If there's any wikilawyering going on, it's Netscott's claim that something violated policy, but refusal to actually quote the policy.
In addition, I find it tiresome that people bring their article content disputes to this list. This is the fourth place Netscott has insisted on having this discussion; on the article Talk: page, on my Talk: page, on WP:AN/I, and now here. If he wants to raise an article RfC let him do so.
Jay. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l