At 06:28 AM 10/21/03 -0600, Fred Bauder wrote:
Yes, just put
it back on the page. What about the basic question of whether
Wikipedia should be NPOV, and how we do that? Maybe we should finally stop
circumventing that question and actually discuss it. Would be useful, I'd
say.
Andre Engels
This article, Mother Teresa, does cry out for segregation of critical views
from positive views as we seem rather mean spirited to be bringing up all
the uncomfortable facts (even God must have been unaware of them or she
would never have been authorized to perform miracles) just as the Catholic
community is celebrating a new saint. But I note the John Paul Jones
article effectively debunks an American secular saint.
You're assuming the conclusion here: namely, that (a) there is a God,
who (b) has given the Catholic Church the ability to identify saints, and
(c) that said church never makes mistakes.
If, conversely, the criticisms of Mother Theresa are valid (which I think
they are, but that's open to debate), and the Catholic church has declared
her to be a saint (a fact), that leads to questions about what beatification
means.
This could be done in a separate article, or in a
separate section within
the article. Interspersed throughout the article it definitely breaks the
spell, aura of holiness.
Wikipedia's job is not to create an aura of holiness. We're an encyclopedia.
--
Vicki Rosenzweig
vr(a)redbird.org
http://www.redbird.org