Again I began by saying that I don t think the word is perfect and that it needed to be worked out here rather than simply excised with an NPOV comment on the edit And actually I do have a similar remark from Raul Hilberg s mouth later in the article but I don t believe that this entirely addresses POV NPOV My point is not to say that the Anschluss can not be viewed as the military annexation of Austria but that to view it as simply that would be to misunderstand its essence which would not in any case provide anything like absolution but does have the effect of changing the subject hence my wording tends to conceal In any case to make such a claim without remarking on its limited analytic value and obvious propaganda value would be to set aside a number of basic facts presented elsewhere in the article and to simply reiterate an argument without quotation or attribution and in any case without pointing out what immediately contradicts it is POV of a subtle sort Certainly you can always resort to attributing remarks to some and others but this is below the Gallup level of presenting opinions and does little to inform the reader or grasp essential truths For these reasons I don t think think your weasel proposal achieves neutral although it is so blandly and equivocally stated that one drops one s guard and is therefore less likely to call it out 07 52 21 Jun 2005 UTC