[WikiEN-l] original research, sources, and verification

[Tony Sidaway]

JAY JG said:
>
>>There should be a way to do it that the proponents would  not
>>reasonably object to. For instance, [[Rudolf Hess]] contains an
>>external link to the [[Institute for Historical Review]] which notes
>>that they are Holocaust revisionists, which they do claim to be. And
>>both the majority against such revisionism and the minority for it know
>>exactly what "Holocaust
>>revisionism" means; and anyone who doesn't can follow the link on
>>"revisionist".
>
> Hmm, Historical revisionist seems a bit too easy.  How would you
> characterize that link I gave in the earlier e-mail, in way that warned
>  people what kind of site it was, but the people running it could agree
> with?

Describe a website run by the LaRouche organisation as "a website run by
the LaRouche organisation." Describe a website receiving money from, or
affiliated with, the LaRouche organisation as "a website partly funded by
the LaRouche orgaanisation", "a website wholly funded by the LaRouche
orgaanisation", or "a website affiliated with the LaRouche orgaanisation".
 Be prepared to prove your statements.