The Clemenceau (R 98), a French aircraft carrier article on Wikipedia, shows a classic example of the problem of a lack of editorial vision: 688 words of the 1053 word document are a diatribe about the French government's attempt to have the ship broken up in India in 2006 (where about 80% of all ships are in fact broken up.) The remaining 375 words cover the ship's 40 year career, service in at least 5 wars, and more than one million nautical miles.

Is this final chapter really appropriately balanced against the coverage of the entire history of the vessel? Why is the date the vessel was delayed in passage through the Suez Canal listed in the Wikipedia page for 12 January, but not the day the vessel was christened, commissioned or decommissioned? Bias, perhaps?