Content deleted Content added
Line 277:
:::::I think that the "alleged" in [[Alleged inconsistencies in the Bible]] is subtly different from the "alleged" in [[Alleged textual evidence for Jesus]]. "Inconsistencies in the Bible" is inherently POV, or at least is perceived that way by a good-sized group of readers, so that the "alleged" enables all to approach the article with an open mind. It might be perceived to skew slightly in favor of the dismissal of the "inconsistencies", but the article makes an effort to avoid that bias in the course of the article. In this case, no one is denying the existence of the textual evidence, so that the title with "alleged" seems to skew the direction a bit more strongly towards dismissal of the "textual evidence", even implying that the documents may not exist at all, which is not what you want to say. After considering the issue more, I would vote for the title [[Textual evidence for Jesus]], with a review of the lead to reflect the new title, and to make sure the article remains neutral.
===Compromise===
If need be, I would be willing to compromise on "[[textual evidence of Jesus]]" which would be equally accurate but perhaps slightly less POV. Thoughts? [[User:Sam Spade|[[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] [[User talk:Sam Spade|Spade]] [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004|Arb Com election]]]] 14:17, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
| |||