> Be careful to avoid even the semblance of taking sides in the war. If one version was more or less accepted afterwards, it's OK to note that, but the fact that an edit war occurred means that neither side was "in the right all along".
What about when one party is actively spreading misinformation? A statement that no one is never right in an edit war just gives misinformation credibility.
(Examples could be that smoking is safe, climate change is a hoax, ect.)
> Be careful to avoid even the semblance of taking sides in the war. If one version was more or less accepted afterwards, it's OK to note that, but the fact that an edit war occurred means that neither side was "in the right all along".
What about when one party is actively spreading misinformation? A statement that no one is never right in an edit war just gives misinformation credibility.
(Examples could be that smoking is safe, climate change is a hoax, ect.)