Difference between revisions of "Talk:Accelerate"
From Conservapedia
(→Historical statements without research) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:: Well, somewhere ''someone'' had to do the research. The military website may be the distilled information for many things, but it lacks the actual building and commission records that would be useful references. Well - thats the use of the fact tag - a reminder that people need to go back and hunt down the references some day. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 11:31, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | :: Well, somewhere ''someone'' had to do the research. The military website may be the distilled information for many things, but it lacks the actual building and commission records that would be useful references. Well - thats the use of the fact tag - a reminder that people need to go back and hunt down the references some day. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 11:31, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::: Yes, the taxpayers did the research! Anyways, this site just wants filler material and doesn't appear to be overly concerned by this. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 11:37, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
It is free material which is allowed to be copied. And Mtur, if you want links, '''''add them'''''. I need to be making other articles.--[[User:BethanyS|Beth]]<sup>[[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']]</sup> 11:27, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | It is free material which is allowed to be copied. And Mtur, if you want links, '''''add them'''''. I need to be making other articles.--[[User:BethanyS|Beth]]<sup>[[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']]</sup> 11:27, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| Line 12: | Line 14: | ||
There is a reference at the bottom of the page. And watch it I can block you for offense. --[[User:BethanyS|Beth]]<sup>[[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']]</sup> 11:33, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | There is a reference at the bottom of the page. And watch it I can block you for offense. --[[User:BethanyS|Beth]]<sup>[[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']]</sup> 11:33, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : You might as well, you could score a whole point with that! --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 11:37, 10 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 15:37, July 10, 2007
Historical statements without research
Many of the statements in this article are not obvious and are lacking historical research and statements. Is this something that could be handed in as an assignment? --Mtur 11:16, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
- Actually, it's a complete cut and paste job from the military website linked at the bottom. But, that is apparently what is being encouraged to do around here, especially with this "contest". --Colest 11:25, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
- Well, somewhere someone had to do the research. The military website may be the distilled information for many things, but it lacks the actual building and commission records that would be useful references. Well - thats the use of the fact tag - a reminder that people need to go back and hunt down the references some day. --Mtur 11:31, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
- Yes, the taxpayers did the research! Anyways, this site just wants filler material and doesn't appear to be overly concerned by this. --Colest 11:37, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
It is free material which is allowed to be copied. And Mtur, if you want links, add them. I need to be making other articles.--BethTalk2ME 11:27, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
- I don't know where to begin looking for the commission records. I am adding links to what I find, though it is most disappointing to see the role models for Conservapedia adding material with no links in it - it sets a poor example for other users about how an article should be created and what should be in it. --Mtur 11:31, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
There is a reference at the bottom of the page. And watch it I can block you for offense. --BethTalk2ME 11:33, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
- You might as well, you could score a whole point with that! --Colest 11:37, 10 July 2007 (EDT)
