Talk:Ferguson and Erickson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	This article is related to WikiProject Columbia, an attempt to write quality articles about the Missouri city of Columbia and the surrounding Metropolitan Area. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of Low-importance within Columbia.

	Missouri Portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] NPOV

This article seems to be very POV. I wanted to discuss here before starting to clean it up some. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.140.93 (talk) 14:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

In order to be POV there has to be something unbalanced about it. Is there any significant evidence of guilt that is not included? Does it resort to name-calling or specious arguments to advance one side? The fact that accurate reporting does not flatter one’s favorite side does not mean that it is POV. The reference section could probably use a cleanup. --Danras 05:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

With comments like "You can see for yourself", it's clearly written to sway the reader toward the author's point of view. Instead of presenting arguments against the validity of the case, the article should present the known objective information. The existence of the dispute is a fact, but the validity of testimony and the validity of the decision of the court are merely viewpoints, no matter how compelling. Merennulli (talk) 08:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)