Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Tightlacing

A sincere question: on the project page, a number of people recommend "resolving the conflict". Does this mean that anyone who shows up at Wikipedia, no matter how idiosyncratic his or her views, gets to insert them in an article? I've now worked on a number of controversial articles and I've got no problem with writing an account of widely-held views with which I disagree. But what if someone waaaaay out there wants to advance his views on the evils of microwaved food, or the necessity for twice-daily bowel movements? If he or she is the only person who believes this, exactly how is this opinion worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia? Zora 18:56, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

''A sincere question: on the project page, a number of people recommend "resolving the conflict". Does this mean that anyone who shows up at Wikipedia, no matter how idiosyncratic his or her views, gets to insert them in an article?'' Not quite. It means anyone who shows up, no matter how idiosyncratic their views, gets to make the argument that these views are held by others and must be represented in the article, to work towards the Neutral point of view. But we are still an encyclopedia: it's not our intent to allow people with a specific agenda to make the article look "their way". That said, you'll find that it's almost never the case that someone is "the only person who believes this". Sometimes, but rarely. If that person can give sources for others expressing this opinion, it's worthy of inclusion, no matter how absurd you think the opinion is. So the question is not: why are we listening to this random nutcase, but: can we show this random nutcase that all sources we have our disposal state view X, and can we convince them to come up with sources that state view Y if they want view Y to have a say in the article? Please read Neutral point of view carefully (it's not an easy or trivial thing) and point your discussion partners to it, as well. If all else fails, ask for Mediation to resolve the conflict. JRM 19:38, 2004 Dec 10 (UTC)