walking in on the middle of an argument thanks for the message however the analogy you've chosen is incorrect when i walk in on an argument then i cannot have heard what has happened before however on a talk page i can read the whole thing and trace any talk page discussion when i posted my first question was intentionally dumbed down as if i didn't know what was going on then as the replies came in i could respond to them in terms of npov in articles this is how i see it for example person a writes and article which contains the phrase scientology is bad there is then an article written about person a mr a was born in and on and live with et cetera then under his work it says he wrote an article saying 'scientology is bad' i could not in all conscience remove that statement from the article because the bias is from the speaker not the editor the gist of the talk page on wp scn was that any negative comments which had been quoted accurately but were negative should be balanced out and that is not something i could let happen