NPOV policy?

[Farman]

As Elanthipedia grows, I think it would be valuable to establish how
much of the Wikipedia policy template we are going to follow.
Naturally we are a lot smaller, with a much tighter focus, so I don't
think we need as much formality. But already I have seen a few
articles here and there where it was clear that the information posted
was colored significantly by the author's personal views on one or two
controversial subjects, to the extent that IMO the article was more of
an opinion piece than hard information about a game system.

I think there should definitely be a place for opinion and commentary,
but when it comes to informational articles about game elements, the
writing should be as NPOV as possible.

An example for how to handle this might be what I have recently done
in the Nissa's Binding article (http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Nissa
%27s_Binding). I segregated opinionated stuff into a 'commentary'
section.

On a larger scale there could also be a whole section of the
Elanthipedia for essays and other opinion/analysis pieces.

[Naeya]

Frankly, unless noted like you did in Nissa's Binding or even better,
kept to talk pages only, I don't think opinions have any place in main
game info articles.

http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Diarik Diarik has already
published a number of personal essays, so I do see these as a viable
resource as well, as long as they are linked from main articles and
clearly marked as opinion pieces.

But yes, in answer to your question, I believe the majority of our
content, relating to hard game data, should be in the neutral point of
view.

~Naeya