You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] 4235218? [S] ago 

Yeah, "dope" is, "superstition monger" and "defender of pedophiles" are factual. "Religious extremist" also describes and fits him perfectly, is that passable?

0
1

[–] OhBlindOne 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It may be factually correct; however, it's still self-editorialized. You're editing an article to fit what you want it to say.

If the title you're providing is reflecting the content of the article (or is just a copy/paste of the article heading) then it's okay. But, if you're adding in your own personal bias (that you don't like the Pope, whether you have facts to back it up or not) then it becomes an issue with creating a misleading title.

0
1

[–] 4260829? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Agreed, re: being permitted to edit titles as long as it conveys information actually contained with in the article. Sometimes additional context is necessary or helpful, and users may do it whenever they wish. In this case, this is a valid deletion, considering it's an opinion not in the article.