[Wikipedia-l] Non-notability "abuse"

[Ian Tresman]

>Neutral, regarding conspiracy theories and pseudoscience, is to state
>the theory's fundamental statement, note that it is not considered
>part of mainstream science (or insert field), and then go ahead and
>describe the details in a neutral fashion.  Once that's done, a
>criticisms section noting how mainstream science (or insert field)
>believes the theory to be wrong.

Indeed, I did say that we describe the mainstream view and criticism. 
That is not the same as writing the article from those perspectives.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NPOV#Undue_weight
>"We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a
>small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view. Views
>that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in
>articles devoted to those views. To give undue weight to a
>significant-minority view, or to include a tiny-minority view, might
>be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. Wikipedia aims to
>present competing views in proportion to their representation among
>experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties."


I agree totally. Note: "tiny minority should not be represented except in
articles devoted to those views".

Regards,


Ian Tresman
www.plasma-universe.com