`: No ``rebuttal`` section, please.  I don't think ``rebuttals`` as such belong in the article.  Rather, a good rebuttal may have us removing the accusation as off-topic (WP:FRINGE).  : We can have an ``opposing views`` subsection, I suppose.  (The ``view`` opposed would be that this is indeed an instance of state terrorism``.)  If specific ``opposing views`` are significant, we can have a section for each.  : Or we could just present all views in one section.  It seems possible, at least while the section remains short.  : Either way, the space allotted to each view (other than the truly marginal) should be proportionate to its prominence (WP:NPOV).  Not equal.  Not severely limited.  But proportionate to its prominence. —     ::Agree fully. I think you put it the best.     `