User:Milspecsim/sandbox

Obama article bias.
I have read a few of the pages on current politicians here, and all of them include a section of questionable actions, criticism, and other information not on the positive side. I noticed more on the Republican pages than Independent or Democrat. Wikipedia has been very good at keeping things neutral, but this page is not. From what I read I am under the impression that someone is actively editing this page on a near daily basis, removing items that cast any shadow of controversy on him.

I must call the neutrality of this article into question. There is no mention of his questioned birth status recently heard in the US Supreme Court, what SS numbers are assigned, names he has used in the past, nor his controversial terms in the Illinois legislature or at the federal level.

The validity of the controversy, whether factual or not should be included here for a non-biased and neutral article. As in the old saying "The Good, The Bad, and The ugly" are needed for a neutral bias. This article reads like a puff news item, not up to the standards of Wikipedia.

This is a copy of a post on the talk page. I do believe people are heavily editing the Obama Page, removing any negative bias, resulting in an article that does not meet Wikipedia standards.Milspecsim (talk) 01:39, 30 March 2013 (UTC)