User talk:CrazyBonnieLuv

Raj Bhakta
WP:NPOV does most definitely not say what you claim. Please acquaint yourself with relevent guidelines & policies before attempting to invoke them. WilyD 17:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Here's the relevent section:

Attributing and substantiating biased statements
Sometimes, a potentially biased statement can be reframed into an NPOV statement by attributing or substantiating it.

For instance, "John Doe is the best baseball player" is, by itself, merely an expression of opinion. One way to make it suitable for Wikipedia is to change it into a statement about someone whose opinion it is: "John Doe's baseball skills have been praised by baseball insiders such as Al Kaline and Joe Torre," as long as those statements are correct and can be verified. The goal here is to attribute the opinion to some subject-matter expert, rather than to merely state it as true.

A different approach is to substantiate the statement, by giving factual details that back it up: "John Doe had the highest batting average in the major leagues from 2003 through 2006." Instead of using the vague word "best," this statement spells out a particular way in which Doe excels.

There is a temptation to rephrase biased or opinion statements with weasel words: "Many people think John Doe is the best baseball player." But statements of this form are subject to obvious attacks: "Yes, many people think so, but only ignorant people"; and "Just how many is 'many'? I think it's only 'a few' who think that!" By attributing the claim to a known authority, or substantiating the facts behind it, you can avoid these problems.

The part you excised was written exactly right. LisaDel is almost certainly working for the campaign of Raj what's-his-face, and scrubbing Wikipedia of spam is a thankless but important task. WilyD 17:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)