User talk:Mr.grantevans
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. Please always observe our core policies. Thank you. --ForbiddenWord 14:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Exactly my point. It seems we have a different interpretation of NPOV; mine is very sensitive to what I consider to be the tendancy to accept and contribute US government positions on topics (such as the motives behind invading Afghanistan)as being fact rather than US government positions. Mr.grantevans 14:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- NPOV does not have to do with the US Government position on any given subject but rather the larger consensus of the reporting community and any other reliable sources from which information pertinent to the subject can be gleaned. --ForbiddenWord 15:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Exactly my point. It seems we have a different interpretation of NPOV; mine is very sensitive to what I consider to be the tendancy to accept and contribute US government positions on topics (such as the motives behind invading Afghanistan)as being fact rather than US government positions. Mr.grantevans 14:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
With regard to your comments on User talk:Damburger: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --ForbiddenWord 14:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- I beg to differ with your categorization of my friendly supportive comment to another user. It did not address any person but rather a systemic problem regarding content and in no way fits within the definition of personal attack,in my view. But thanks for the heads up even if it is without merit. Mr.grantevans 14:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Characterizing users that you have had disagreements with as children is a personal attack, and in no way is helpful toward constructive discourse. --ForbiddenWord 15:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- I beg to differ with your categorization of my friendly supportive comment to another user. It did not address any person but rather a systemic problem regarding content and in no way fits within the definition of personal attack,in my view. But thanks for the heads up even if it is without merit. Mr.grantevans 14:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)