[WikiEN-l] insist on sources

[Oldak Quill]

On 20/07/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> A point I have made more than once.  But this seems to single
> Armstrong out.  The section is gradually getting bigger and bigger,
> with special pleading and guilt by association creeping back in.  I do
> not see how it can be considered neutral to give the strong impression
> that he is a doper who has not been caught, which is what one or two
> editors are determinedly trying to do, when the legal position is that
> he is clean, despite being quite possibly the most tested athlete in
> history.

Well, there is no evidence that he is, or ever has, doped or else he
would have been stripped of his titles. I can't see how saying it is a
possibility is fair. What we can say is that his number one rival has
accused him of doping.

-- 
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)