SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,592
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 706:
Line 706: + +
→too many reversions needed to include key statements; can suggest edits on talk page: What does Andy propose
:''"If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."''
:''"If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."''
You are pounding the table a lot! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 23:31, 11 February 2013 (EST)
You are pounding the table a lot! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 23:31, 11 February 2013 (EST)
What is our goal? If everyone can show some diplomacy we can have a win-win situation. I know one editor here wants to score "points" against what he views as the liberal scientific establishment. I am unclear as to why the E=mc² article is an appropriate place for this. The downside to the article in its current form is that it is widely ridiculed and undercuts CP's credibility regarding many well-written articles. I think that AugustO had a better approach. He included some of the religious views as a separate paragraph, but also had a paragraph that said that E=mc² fits the experimental data. Now that the article has been protected from editing, I would be interested in hearing how Andy proposes to develop a new version that has less opinion and more valuable information. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:49, 11 February 2013 (EST)