== St. Volodymyr's Cathedral == 

 Dear David, 

 I would like to bring your attention to the article on St. Volodymyr's Cathedral. Less than two weeks ago this was a nicely-written article about the Cathedral, about the architecture, mosaics, frescoes, the history how the Cathedral was built etc. (see the last version of by Mzajac ) 

 At  decided to use this preaty neutral and nice article to push his POV that is far from being neutral (see his contribution ). This stared a long-lasting edit war. 

 Even if his insertion were neutral (this was definitelly not the case) this is a serious question whether it's legal to use  architecture, art, music etc. articles for advertising (or bringing attention to) political issues. Does it improve the Wikipedia content? Does it make the work of editors more productive? Is it not an abuse of Wikipedia for propaganda purposes? 

 It looks like this is a more broad question. Inserting political stuff into initially quite neutral, nice and polpular articles is quite common in Wikipedia. I admit that the question is not simple. Sometimes political stuff is important and the article looks incomplete without it. But in most cases the politiocal stuff is irrelevant and just force the reader to spend his/her time for reading the information s/he was not actually looking for.  
 In my opinion, a serious discussion is needed. What's your opinion? 
 
 It would be indeed nice to protect the article in its politics-free form until the discussion is over. 

 On the other hand, if   and   consider the political stuff important they can write a separate article on the subject. Is it not a reasonable compromize? It would be however nice if somebody of experienced and respectable users would explain  and  , that it is extremely important to base the Wikipedia articles on creadible sources and to avoid any propaganda issues.