reset indent Ignore policy You cant even point us to the relevant policy Nonetheless how could Wiki possibly decide an article that has a criticism section could be a Featured Article Controversial subject PETA Really  list all the controversial items for me please I did not ignore your response I thought my answer was clear  but Ill ride the donkey for ya  A single section containing criticisms is an example of a poorly structured article as it means that people reading about a subject have to look in the section about it for the noncriticism and then a second section to see if there is any criticism This is a statement to which I have refuted wholly by showing you an example of an article that is not porrly rather superbly written also the criticism section does nothing but DESCRIBE the criticism involved with the topic eg whyhowwhat re criticism of the Canadian Charter SeeNaming a section Criticisms or something similar is giving Wikipedia a POV Specious We wish to DESCRIBE the criticisms not create them We therefore need a section do do so I concur though forking is counterproductive Man you got a little pet name for everythingsuch a section is normally just a troll magnet and POV magnet making things difficult to manage First that is tantamount to cutting off your nose to spite your face crappy articles because a good one would attract undue attention Thats silliness Moreover good articles are far less likely to be attacked by vandals And lastly protect the pages once wellwritten  dont make drivel out of the article just because writing it correctly ie like the featured articles would attract attention Change the management method insteadOn top of all that I submit that this PETAAR debacle is so controversial for no other reason than that the articles are poorly written They are biased they are agendadriven they lack recognition DESCRIPTION of criticisms and they are quite obviously overprotected and coddled over by people who truly dont want criticism to see the light of day Now please list all the controversial items re PETA for me please

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
reset indent Ignore policy You cant even point us to the relevant policy Nonetheless how could Wiki possibly decide an article that has a criticism section could be a Featured Article Controversial subject PETA Really  list all the controversial items for me please I did not ignore your response I thought my answer was clear  but Ill ride the donkey for ya  A single section containing criticisms is an example of a poorly structured article as it means that people reading about a subject have to look in the section about it for the noncriticism and then a second section to see if there is any criticism This is a statement to which I have refuted wholly by showing you an example of an article that is not porrly rather superbly written also the criticism section does nothing but DESCRIBE the criticism involved with the topic eg whyhowwhat re criticism of the Canadian Charter SeeNaming a section Criticisms or something similar is giving Wikipedia a POV Specious We wish to DESCRIBE the criticisms not create them We therefore need a section do do so I concur though forking is counterproductive Man you got a little pet name for everythingsuch a section is normally just a troll magnet and POV magnet making things difficult to manage First that is tantamount to cutting off your nose to spite your face crappy articles because a good one would attract undue attention Thats silliness Moreover good articles are far less likely to be attacked by vandals And lastly protect the pages once wellwritten  dont make drivel out of the article just because writing it correctly ie like the featured articles would attract attention Change the management method insteadOn top of all that I submit that this PETAAR debacle is so controversial for no other reason than that the articles are poorly written They are biased they are agendadriven they lack recognition DESCRIPTION of criticisms and they are quite obviously overprotected and coddled over by people who truly dont want criticism to see the light of day Now please list all the controversial items re PETA for me please

