On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:11:11 +0100, Raphael Wegmann
<raphael(a)psi.co.at> wrote:
>> We won't stop before we get precisely what
we want either.
> Which is a verifiably neutral encyclopaedia. And
that's bad
> because?....
Well it shows, that you and your opponents share the
determination.
It would be bad, if determination turns to fanaticism and leads
to collateral damage (editors who get blocked, just because they
have a different view on what a verifiably neutral encyclopaedia
should look like).
Have you ever actually looked at Wikipedia Review? Just curious.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG