Wikipedia article on Sexism in India

But only for grammar. Now the article has been flagged because somebody says its neutrality is disputed. I think it's stating the facts, that's it. We need to go into the discussion page and let them know that it's stating facts.

Wow! Whoever that is challenging that article is determined to silence it.

"The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting verifiable perspectives on a topic as evidenced by reliable sources."

Would the early days of feminism or civil rights movement survive this requirement on Wiki?

"Reliable sources": It is a generally accepted standard that editors should follow, though it should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page "

Consensus. Isn't that what kept women and minorites down? Wasn't a flat earth a result of consensus? Isn't the current global warming lie the result of consensus? Was the rowdy feminist crowd at Duke University caused by a consensus that the boys were guilty?

Consensus is not nearly as binding as a jury verdict. It doesn't even mean a majority of interested parties. It just states, right or wrong, what the KNOWN OPINION of a group of people is. For instance, among members of the KKK, the concensus is that blacks are inferior.

The Bill of Rights was established to protect the rights of the "little" guy, the individual, the small group of people who hold different beliefs.

Wiki's insistance on consensus flies in the face of Equality. Yes, now that feminists and minorities reptesent the Establishment, let's not allow minority views. They are no longer relevant.

Let Equality flourish, the chips fall where they may.