Content deleted Content added
→Re: POV Tag for 'Sui Generis' Section: new section |
|||
Line 491:
I read this section as an unbiased observer but noted its unusually high amount of personal analysis. The brunt of the argument that Palestine falls into a Sui Generis case, additionally, was limited to but a few sources. I went to the talk page to investigate whether this had previously been discussed. A number of editors here have demonstrated that nearly all reliable sources claim Palestine was a Class A Mandate. The dispute on this fact was brought in by a fringe viewpoint which was clearly shown to not be consensus in an earlier discussion. Based on these facts, the Sui Generis section is a flagrant POV violation. Why this section has been allowed to stand is beyond me, but I hope that this tag will bring editors back here for additional discussion and review of this issue. [[Special:Contributions/64.231.221.113|64.231.221.113]] ([[User talk:64.231.221.113|talk]]) 22:07, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
: I guess this is my fault for not rewriting it when I promised. It is quite unacceptable to have a fringe opinion at the top level instead of the overwhelming classification of Palestine as a Class A Mandate. A few sentences in the "Class A" section noting that some sources disagree (the 1937 royal commission and Sabel) would be enough. Anything more, especially unreliable activists like Eli and Grief, does not belong at all. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 23:30, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
| |||