response to gnangarra and a suggestion for a compromise introduction thanks gnangarra for your comments everyone interprets policies differently and this talk page is no exception to that there are two policies widely debated here which are wp blp and wp undue i am summarising opinions of the editors involved in this discussion based on the current talk page i did not include opinions from blp notice board and individual members talk pages if i may have made mistakes unintentional in the summarisation please feel free to remind me and i will correct now while gnangarra pete skyring suturz and yeti hunter think it is wp blp violation mickmacnee merbabu orderinchaos peter ballard chaser lester matilda and carbon rodney dont gnagarra and orderinchaos believe it violates wp undue mickmacnee matilda and carbon rodney dont quote from wp blp my interpretation the reason why gnangarra thinks it violates blp is because of the availability of only one reliable source as far as i understand reliable sources in plural do not mean that it needs more than one reliable source even if a strict requirement for multiple sources need to be strictly followed as asserted by gnangarra we have more than one instance when howard was accused of war crimes as noted in the begining of this talk page including the head of a state please remember the key word here is war crime allegations not crimes due to these reasons i personally think that this does not violate blp as with many others clarify you are taking my comments out of context you ask specifically what policies was i quoting for opposing the text it was the lack of multiple independent sources ie one reliable source the abc article though still questionable as its lacking specific details in this blp is clear poorly source contentious material should be removed garra quote from wp undue and my interpretation i guess the first quote deals with two different views an example can be that one view being that the world is round and one being world is flat in our current dispute i am not sure what we are comparing are we comparing reports that he was alleged of war crimes and not alleged of war crimes if such reports exists which contradict the abc news reports or are we comparing that he was alleged of war crimes and he never commited war crimes it is hard to make the distinction here the second quote says that minority view should not be represented at all except in articles devoted to those views the content in dispute may fail inclusion as per wp undue because the belief that he commited war crimes are held by a small n