[Wikipedia-l] facts not conjecture

[Padreger at aol.com]

you make a good point here, Jason.    

Pat

 > 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 09:11:46AM -0400, Padreger at aol.com wrote:
> >   >  
> > > This is very true!   Maybe the fact that there ARE two sides to the 
> story, 
> > neither completely right or wrong, is the point ?   
> > 
> >  It is admittedly very difficult to write a completely unbiased paragraph 
> 
> > about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the initial article-- [sorry, 
> I'm 
> > not up to snuff on semantics here with wikipedia]-- reached by an 
> outsider 
> > doing a casual search could be a statement that the conflict exists 
> between 
> > whom, where, when...etc. ...and certain factual info re treaties, etc.  
> then 
> > a link to the individual sides' position?    
> 
> I think the problem with the idea of a page for each position is that it
> will inevitably lead people into thinking they have a free rein to ignore
> NPOV, simply because the one page is "balanced" by the other - most
> likely ending up in a spiral of increasing bias. (Well, the other page
> says this horribly biased thing, I'm justified in saying something
> non-neutral on this page).
> 
> -- 
> Khendon  (Jason Williams)
> khendon at khendon.org.uk    http://www.jasonandali.org.uk/jason/
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20020920/47c4fb57/attachment.htm