On 5/6/06, A <jokestress(a)gmail.com> wrote:
3. Are "criticism" sections valid in
general, or do they just become a
repository for quibbles and an amplifier of relatively insignificant
hatecruft about a person?
They are not only valid, in many cases they are necessary. Wikipedia
is not Wikinfo, writing from a "sympathetic point of view". I hope
that nobody would argue that we should have an article about [[Ann
Coulter]], [[Michael Moore]], [[Uri Geller]], or [[Alexander
Lukashenko]] that does not include criticism. Important public and
political figures in particular may affect, through their action or
inaction, an entire society. To not describe the reaction in
encyclopedic terms, or worse, to only describe one side of the
reaction, completely undermines the purpose of an encyclopedia.
Criticism should certainly be part of an article, but I've always
found it poor writing style to put it in its own section.
Anthony