What items, specifically, are being debated on D'anna's page? It appears to me to be a fairly straightforward bio, and basic list of events. It's also been clearly stated on the MUCK, on many occasions, why she's well-known, and that is primarily for the two reasons given: her club (specifically, it's anti-herm policy) and how her species relates to her club. That's why she's been called a hypocrite. The article doesn't seem to me to take a stand one way or the other, it simply states what other people have done in the past, and that's a statement of fact...those things have been said, and those actions have been taken. It's logged on the MUCK somewhere, I'm sure, and can't really be debated.
I don't really see anything else that smacks of a strong opinion one way or the other. In fact, the article has several statements like 'whether for good or ill' and similar that take a distinctly neutral stance.
Update: Page edited on 03/22/06 to try and approach neutrality and resolve NPOV
- The phrases that I had issues with things like "well known artist" and similar. I didn't even notice the stuff about herms and whatnot because all that text was smooshed together. --Dmuth 20:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Page looks okay to me now. Seems to take a middle-of-the-road approach, sticks to the facts and history, and avoids opinions. Artist comments have been edited. Pending approval, clear NPOV status?
- Yeah, it looks better to me. I see no reason why it can't be removed along with the cleanup template. --Dmuth 16:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)