Difference between revisions of "WikiMoonWeb Talk:Save Our Sailors"

From WikiMoon
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
:I thought the original article is "ok" because it parallels most info I read elsewhere about SOS, & its tone also isn't as opinionated as those info. But now that I've read your comments, I think maybe it's those info that are far too biased, making the original article look comparatively "neutral." --[[User:210|210]] 04:42, 21 April 2007 (MST)
 
:I thought the original article is "ok" because it parallels most info I read elsewhere about SOS, & its tone also isn't as opinionated as those info. But now that I've read your comments, I think maybe it's those info that are far too biased, making the original article look comparatively "neutral." --[[User:210|210]] 04:42, 21 April 2007 (MST)
 +
 +
Nice job Kero, that's exactly what I had in mind.--[[User:WikiSysop|WikiSysop]] 12:49, 22 April 2007 (MST)

Revision as of 14:49, 22 April 2007

Could someone please read over the article for neutrality? I tried, but I admit I'm not the most unbiased person when it comes to SOS. Kerochan no Miko 11:01, 20 April 2007 (MST)

I think it's ok. --210 18:58, 20 April 2007 (MST)

To the original writer: While I appreciate your efforts, you need to be careful in keeping a neutral POV when writing fandom articles. A lot of words, like "infamous," carry connotations that express an opinion. Unfortunately I found that a lot of the article was unsourced and while I know you attempted to be honest, I could see bias creeping into the article's structure.

Please source EVERYTHING when writing these articles; it's the internet, it's logged somewhere. Even the poptarts part needs links to the original source material on SOS's websites, or at newsgroups. Otherwise it feels to me like rumors are begetting rumors. The Prince Uranus article, which was written a long while back, is a good example of how to write a fandom article. Notice how it only sticks to listing the facts of what happened.--WikiSysop 21:31, 20 April 2007 (MST)

I thought the original article is "ok" because it parallels most info I read elsewhere about SOS, & its tone also isn't as opinionated as those info. But now that I've read your comments, I think maybe it's those info that are far too biased, making the original article look comparatively "neutral." --210 04:42, 21 April 2007 (MST)

Nice job Kero, that's exactly what I had in mind.--WikiSysop 12:49, 22 April 2007 (MST)