" 

 == Request for Comment == 

 == Headline text ==sa 
 santa is a myth is it real 

 santa is not real hes a myth I would appreciate admin participation in these dicussions. There is dispute as to whether the term ""mythological"" used in the introduction of the article is absolutely necessary to the article's integrity, and whether or not having the sentence state that Santa Claus is a ""legendary and historical character"" is any less legitimate than claiming that he is a ""legendary, historical, and mythological character"". I also request that  be explicitly forbidden from participating in this RFC as he has already make his position quite clear in the above discussions.   

 *First, to not include it would violate the WP:LEAD guideline.  This request comes from the above discussions where some editors don't want us to say Santa is not real out of Christmas spirit.   We are an encyclopedia and we are not here to support myths.  We exist for truth.  It goes against everything we do on here, which is to present the world as it is, not as children believe it to be.  It is also against WP:NPOV.  Simply put: Wikipedia is not, under any circumstance, the place to hide truth. ""Legendary"" and ""historical"" do not show that Santa is a fable, a myth.  A real person can be ""legendary"".  A real person can be ""historical.""  Neither of those terms make clear, as the Easter Bunny article does, that Santa is a myth.  David '  
 :So, you don't think Shankbone should be allowed to participate bc he has already expressed his opinions? Does that mean you cannot, either? After all, you've expressed your POV, having it reverted twice. If he cannot participate, then neither can you. Hint - you might want to revise your RfC so as to remove the petty crap like that, or it gets ignored. -    
 ::Yes, I agree that neither I nor Shankbone should participate. I would like the opinions of some third-party administrators.    
 :::Well, i would like a summer with Natalie Portman or Diane Lane. I'm not bloody likely to get that either. Anyone contributing to the article/article discussion gets to weigh in (as per, y'know, that whole, ""encyclopedia that anyone can edit""). -    
 ::::Rhythmnation2004 is also operating under the erroneous assumption that being an admin on here carries with it some sort of significance, when it does not. Admins have more tools; they don't have more say.  David '  
 :::::David is right about this. I'm a staunch opponent of admin worship. And since I'm an admin, you should listen to me. (Kidding, but honestly, we're not traveling judges.)  '  

 *Include - Mythological should be included because he is a mythological character.    
 *Include - sorry, but the move to disinclude mythological is a cynical attempt to manipulate the article so that kids don't accidentally discover the truth. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a parent. We are neutral, not Scrooges. So, fo all the reasons listed througho