User talk:Pointless Exercise

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. As you have probably noticed, a couple of users (myself included) have taken issue with some of the material that you have added to AIDS reappraisal. Obviously, this is an inflammatory issue that is difficult to reconcile with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Since the two primary contributors to that article (again, myself included) are of the dissident perspective, we welcome contributions by someone with a viewpoint opposed to our own, since it can provide the article with balance, so long as the conflict does not degenerate into edit wars and unhelpful debate.

User:Revolver and I feel that many of the contributions you have made to the article are phrased in such a way that they cause the article to be biased against those who believe AIDS should be re-evaluated. Such perspectives should certainly be included in the article, but as it currently stands, the article seems to be "arguing with itself", so to speak. This is generally not what is meant by our neutral POV policy; such disagreements should really be phrased in a manner similar to what I have done: So-and-so says this, so-and-so rebukes by saying this. This is, to my mind, the most neutral approach to the subject, especially when "facts" are under dispute.

Also, as I have noted on the talk page of the article, part of my objection to the material you have inserted is that it is disruptive to the flow of discussion that I was hoping to achieve in the "Arguments by dissidents" section. It was my intention that this section should provide an overview of the arguments made by dissidents, with an overview of the responses made by the supporters of the HIV theory. The article would become prohibitively lengthy if each point is to be discussed in such detail; a separate article may be a more appropriate place to expose the details of each point of contention.

I hope we can find a way to meet in the middle on this article. Please let me know what your thoughts are on how we can resolve these issues. Thanks! -- Wapcaplet 15:27 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)