See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%C2%BFPor_qu%C3%A9_no_te_callas%3F
SandyGeorgia trying to nail this guy (User:Manning53) down on "Do you
understand our reliable sources policy? Can you name some?" ... and
he fails to engage her on that, simply asserting repeatedly that it's
some sort of US-centric plot.
She remains polite and explains several times. He remains off handle.
Not a whole lot to see here, I think.
-george
On Feb 13, 2008 2:10 AM, Cormac Lawler <cormaggio(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008 8:32 AM, Steve Bennett
<stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The academic's original piece (linked from that article), is at: <
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6954>gt;. The main issue is of
"reliable sources" - and the insinuation that ZMag/Net was being dismissed
offhand as a source. If that is being done in practice - and I haven't
looked up the page in controversy, nor followed anything similar - then Mr
Anderson has a point, even though I think he should have stuck it out
patiently, rather than go ranting on the web when something didn't go his
way immediately.
Cormac
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com