I chose to look at the Wikipedia article on PRISM. This was the mass surveillance program initiated by the NSA back in 2007. From what I can tell by reading through the majority of the article is that the writing style in most sections fits the “neutral” standpoint that Wikipedia likes to hold. In a way it could be beneficial to have two short sections showing the “good and bad” points of view on the subject of mass surveillance. It would give the reader more information that might not be included in the “neutral” article and could be help to someone who is researching the topic. The could use these sections to help direct someone looking for more information to a more “biased” source.
In the Talk section of the article a reader can see the workings behind the article. The main focus I can see here are fact checks in order to make the publicly viewed article correct. There are also some contributors suggesting additions and subtractions from the article to keep up with current events that pertain to PRISM. I may not be reading it all correctly, but from what I can tell there doesn't seem to be much debate between the contributors and their views on the subject.