Firestorm81
"Undue weight"
edit1) The policy about undue weight in Wikipedia doesn't mention "percentages" of sources supporting a position, just vaguely states that "Wikipedia aims to present competing views in proportion to their representation in reliable sources on the subject." This is open to interpretation given the context.
2) Your focus on the supposed lack of neutrality in the section "Assessments" is erroneous. There is nothing in the text contradicting the idea of a "British victory". And since this section deals both with the battle and its aftermath, we simply cannot ignore those sources which describe the consequences of the battle (i. e.: the destruction of the convoy, documented by an overwhelming number of authors). The reference to an Italian "partial achievement" doesn'tcontradicts the fact of the British tactical victory; indeed, neither Mcintyre nor Stephen contradict themselves, since they are not dealing with the same subject. And if they are not dealing with the same subject (they are not putting in doubt the Royal Navy success), tell me please, where is the alleged "undue weight"? It is the same case of our discussion on "tactical victory" and "strategic victory" some months ago. Do you remember? You agreed then that a lonely source claiming an axis strategic success would be valid to support this idea, despite hundreds of authors asserting a British tactical victory.
3) You're miscounting the sources. The idea of partial achievement is supported not only by "three sources" as claimed. The citations include not only Mcintyre, Stephen or Sadkovich, but Bauer and Young, Llewellyn, Simpson, and some Italian sources like Bernotti and Giorgerini. Then we have now 8 sources, already cited in footnotes. And, as exposed in point 2), this is an 8-0 ratio; the partial achievement of the Italian side doesn't contradicts the idea of a "British victory", so this sources don't qualified as a "minority view".
4) I strongly disagree with the proposed changes in the text of the section, since these seem to ignore the aftermath of the battle (the main subject of the title "Assessments", I guess). The wording and the tone also seem unencyclopedic. I would not object, however, the deletion of the paragraph regarding the "Italian victory" imagined by the fascist propaganda.--Darius (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)