has been dismissed as i think such a specific description of how she was dismissed is non npov i deleted it but the delete was reverted so i brought the issue to the discussion page every accusations that exists has been used to describe her i'd like to know the exact text of the paper source cited for that summary to see if it is an actual summary besides even if the source is reliable and that an honest representation it seems like a non npov summary itself being made by that source which can't be used or else the new york time's and wall street journal's editorial pages could each have their opinions held as fact i know that the printed article isn't describing her philosophy as sophmoric and preachy itself but even a summary of someone else's opinions can be non npov if made so easily and is so strongly in one direction a printed opinion that everyone loves hates someone would still be considered npov even if from a reliable source that does not necessarily hold that opinion itself