Eclictology wrote:
Taking this one step further -- Neutral writing is
often viewed by
partisans as seriously biased in favour of the opponents.
That's why interpreting NPOV as the middle ground is a big mistake.
On articles such as these, it may be that we can /never/
simply state anything as fact, if even basic facts are disputed.
If everything in an article says �X said Y about Z.�,
then (assuming that it's undisputed that X did say that)
partisans are unlikely to view the article as truly biased.
(They may view it as unacceptable wishy-washy, but that's different.)
OTOH, if /we/ say something about Z, then add �But X said Y instead.�,
then this can easily be viewed as biased against X.
-- Toby