On 11/15/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 04:40:12 -0500, "Alec Conroy" alecmconroy@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone who showed up accusing of us of suppressing our critics would have a giant shiny article we could point to where we could say "Oh yea?? well what is THAT article doing here then?"
This rather ignores the fact that we have articles on WikiTruth, Judd Bagley and other prominent critics.
Don't get me wrong-- I'm not saying that at all. I think we do a GREAT job of it.
I'm just saying-- if we CAN cover ED in a NPOV, Verifiable, NOR way, we absolutely should. Another feather in the cap, another trophy in the case-- as indeed, all our articles are.
Having an article because they hate us is no better than not having one because they hate us.
From an encyclopedic point of view, 100% agree. The decion can't be
motivated in any way by "meta-" or wikipolitical concerns. That, I think, is part and parcel of NPOV.
But, between you and me, from a meta point of view, if we get to the point where we CAN have one, that would be extremely impressive of us. :)
Alec
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l