Revision as of 21:50, 5 March 2014 editMorphh (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers18,366 edits Please see Wikipedia_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#ASSERT discussion← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:14, 12 July 2014 edit undoSrich32977 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers299,655 edits →Related discussion: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
== ASSERT == | == ASSERT == | ||
There is a discussion taking place about ASSERT at ] about how we could clarify this section so it doesn't counter or subvert the spirit of NPOV, which I think it does. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>21:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)</i></small> | There is a discussion taking place about ASSERT at ] about how we could clarify this section so it doesn't counter or subvert the spirit of NPOV, which I think it does. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>21:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)</i></small> | ||
== Related discussion == | |||
There is a discussion at ] regarding WP policy and assertions supported by public documents. – ] (]) 20:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:14, 12 July 2014
![]() Archives | ||
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 15 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
These horses go only one way
I have removed the bit from WP:NECESSARY suggesting that it would be appropriate to mention Creationism in an article Evolution of the horse. That article makes no such mention, correctly sussing out that it would be off topic, and we should anyway not be dictating content from a policy page. Our articles on similar topics, from Human evolution to Phylogeny of insects right down to Galaxy formation and evolution, likewise do not consider it an appropriate part of their respective topics. We might replace the text with something differentiating articles discussing the process itself from articles about the development or the social impact of the theory, but the section seems to stand fine without it. - 2/0 (cont.) 10:19, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
ASSERT
There is a discussion taking place about ASSERT at Wikipedia_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#ASSERT about how we could clarify this section so it doesn't counter or subvert the spirit of NPOV, which I think it does. Morphh 21:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Related discussion
There is a discussion at Talk: BLP PRIMARY regarding WP policy and assertions supported by public documents. – S. Rich (talk) 20:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC)