User:RicoCorinth/sandbox/HOAs

Injecting POV by deleting published content, and by altering it, radically changing its meaning
Within Argyriou's massive change, was a little edit that was covered up by the massive change. The original content was sourced, citing a peer-reviewed book published by Yale University Press. Argyriou's edit spins the prose, turning part of it around 180 degrees from its original meaning.

This is what it says before Argyriou's changes: HOA boards of directors operate outside constitutional restrictions because the law views them as business entities rather than governments. Moreover, courts accept the legal fiction that all the owners have voluntarily agreed

This is what it says after Argyriou's changes: HOA boards of directors are not generally bound by constitutional restrictions on governments because the law views them as business entities, and accepts that all the owners have voluntarily agreed

Suddenly, the acceptance is changed from "legal fiction," to a simple fact -- and it is no longer "courts" doing the accepting, but "the law," an unsourced new statement.

There is no specific warning of any of this in the edit summary, which vaguely states that the edit is to "reorganize and start to de-POV."

It doesn't "reorganize", and -- rather than "de-POV" -- it radically converts the sourced content into a POV. The point that professor was making, that HOA boards are (private) governments, is summarily deleted.

No source is provided for the edit -- but what's worse, is that a peer-reviewed textbook still remains as the source of content that's been altered so radically, that it is far from what was published in the source cited!

Here's another example:

This sourced material was in the article before Argyriou's changes:  This disenfranchisement may violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In essence, homeowner associations establish a new community as a municipal corporation without ensuring that those citizens who will be governed have a voice in the decision-making process.

This is what remained after Argyriou's changes:  Critics argue that homeowner associations establish a new community as a municipal corporation without ensuring that the residents governed will have a voice in the decision-making process.

Argyriou's edit changes material that is stated as a fact, in the source cited, into something "critics argue."

Who are these "critics"? The source cited was the Urban Land Institute, a developer organization. The developers are the ones creating the homeowner associations. The ULI isn't an organization of HOA "critics". That would hurt sales, and developers seek to maximize profit.

No source is provided to equate the ULI and "critics".

Anything negative about HOAs must be prefaced with the words "critics argue"? Lots of people criticize politicians, and many of the things that have been published about politicians are negative, but that doesn't mean that everything negative published by reliable sources has been "argued" by "critics".

Finally, this sourced statement was removed: "This disenfranchisement may violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." There was no discussion of the reverting.

"Reorganize and start to de-POV" doesn't describe this deletion.