Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Problem-reaction-solution: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 11:20, 3 March 2023

Latest revision as of 13:40, 25 February 2025

Line 32:

::Oh, one more thing: [[WP:NPOV]]:

:::''. We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view, and views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented '''except in articles devoted to those views'''.''

:::''None of this is to say that tiny-minority views cannot '''receive as much attention as we can give them on pages specifically devoted to them.''' Wikipedia is not paper.''

::We can have [[Goatse.cx]] but not this? We can have [[The Headington Shark]], but not this? --[[User:Striver|Striver]] 17:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Line 47:

*'''delete''' per nom, JoshuaZ, Allen3 & MONGO... /[[User:Wangi|wangi]] 18:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

::Maybe you know how to give a "reliable " non-Mainstream source? What is your answer to [[WP:NPOV]]:

:::''None of this is to say that tiny-minority views cannot '''receive as much attention as we can give them on pages specifically devoted to them.''' Wikipedia is not paper.''

::I would appreciate a answer. --[[User:Striver|Striver]] 18:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

:::Badgering each and every repsonse here will do you no favours. Regardless of the source the article is nonsense anyway - if it is of note you should be able to easy find multiple sources, multiple good sources. We're not here to mirror somebody elses views and website. And by the way can you explain to me (on the article talk page, not here) how come Madrid is listed with empty fields, London is all about "England" and both are listed under unnatural, Americanised, names? /[[User:Wangi|wangi]] 18:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)