Establishing the truth of a proposition, however obvious, as this is, is not the purpose of Wikipedia, nor the purpose of categories. Categories are an aid to the reader to in finding information. To take an example from a current arbitration case (Yoder); He removed the category "Geography of Israel" from the article on Golan Heights. His view was that having the article in that category established or somehow endorsed Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights. However the purpose of the category is to point the reader to the articles which have information which falls into the category, not to establish a fact. Likewise [[cold fusion]] may be included in the Category Pseudo- science, without us knowing whether or not it can occur. It is enough that a the category is a useful guide to the reader. That can mean that articles may fall into contradictory categories, as it is not an exercise in logic but in finding information. Fred On Jun 30, 2005, at 10:00 AM, Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote:

Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote: Yes. Some neutral title like [[Category:Non-mainstream historical claims]] or [[Category:Non-mainstream historical theories]] would be much better. Although on a larger level, I'm not convinced using any of these labels is superior to not using them at all. Is [[Atlantis]] under [[Category:Pseudohistory]]? What about [[The Bible]]? -Mark