User talk:Save Our Values
Please, no liberals here. Only INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION.
- Please review site rules before making further edits to articles. --Ed Poor 14:01, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
- Sorry - they're already here. If you go on a wiki, expect to be torn to pieces :). And I couldn't help but to help others.
'I'm concerned about our values'
Which are, precisely? (sorry, realised that sounds accusatory) In which grouping do they fall?
'which are imperiled by the liberal elites ruling the media.'
Liberal elites, it seems to me =/= FOX News.
Just out of interest, can you give me any concrete examples of this imperillment?
- Sorry, I'll try to tone it down. --Save Our Values 14:05, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
- That's very one-sided. It depends on where you're standing. We should not attribute values to these people. The facts can do that much better. Flippin 14:11, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
Have you read our policies yet? Please take a glance at Help:Contents.
Following up on Flippin's remarks, facts can be better than evalutions - especially when introducing the topic of an article. Later, in the body of the article, we can mention various descriptions such as "he was despotic" or "he was a hero". Many Americans have admired Che Guevara, for example, even though (like Saddam) he was a mass murderer.
It's not easy to be calm, but it's the only way to contribute effectively to an encyclopedia. I've been 'in the business' for over 5 years now; trust me, this is the way to do it. --Ed Poor 14:28, 13 April 2007 (EDT)