|WikiProject Anthropology||(Rated B-class)|
|WikiProject Family and relationships (defunct)|
Lack of impartiality
This article all stands on an obviously false idea. It ignores the fact that most people, any of us, naturally, like any other living being, do care about their offspring and their own individual perpetuation, that they do not cooperate with each other against that purpose, and that only degenerate individuals, a minority, do not. Otherwise, without parents having children, there would be no one in the World. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 01:21, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Here are some wiki guidelines on use of Template:POV tags:
Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag should discuss concerns on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies. In the absence of such a discussion, or where it remains unclear what the NPOV violation is, the tag may be removed by any editor.
The purpose of this group of templates is to attract editors with different viewpoints to edit articles that need additional insight. This template should not be used as a badge of shame. Do not use this template to "warn" readers about the article.
This template should only be applied to articles that are reasonably believed to lack a neutral point of view. The neutral point of view is determined by the prevalence of a perspective in high-quality, independent, reliable secondary sources, not by its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the public.188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- The article calls cultural and symbolic to a natural inclination that every normal living being has and when someone tries to give some clarity to the data by reminding that in small tribes everyone is related and that the value of actual kinship is not put into challenge by the observation, you simply erase it, deny everything and stick to the lies. It's not an opinion, it's a fact, since I know I and everyone I know value actual kinship above anything else and you can't change that. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 02:28, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- I have added a dedicated section for alternative perspectives and critiques, and moved the critical comments into this section and tried to edit them into a convincing message. I hope this will satisfy any impression that the page does not present an NPOV. Please take a look and make some additions or recommendations.220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)