steven l. rubenstein said:
I do not believe that disputes over
content are irresolvable, but I do think that there are POV warriors
who insist on including content even if it comes from narrow and
perhaps even
disreputable sources, and deleting content that is the product of good
research.
Arbcom can and does rule in such cases. In the Robert the Bruce case, for
instance, arbcom affirmed the principle that "Removal of references from
articles is generally inappropriate" by 8-0 and "It is inappropriate to
remove blocks of well-referenced information which is germane to the
subject from articles on the grounds that the information advances a point
of view. Wikipedia's NPOV policy contemplates inclusion of all significant
points of view" by 9-0.
These were also reaffirmed in the case of Robert Blair, who was involved
in the same dispute on the other side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Robert_the_…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Robert_Blair