Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
186 bytes added ,  13:44, February 15, 2013
let's build a new consensus
Line 722: Line 722:  
The article has become detrimental to Conservapedia: it is a monument of Andrew Schlafly's ignorance on this matter. If we (all the other editors interested in this subject) aren't allowed to align this article with reality, the next best thing would be to delete it. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:13, 13 February 2013 (EST)
 
The article has become detrimental to Conservapedia: it is a monument of Andrew Schlafly's ignorance on this matter. If we (all the other editors interested in this subject) aren't allowed to align this article with reality, the next best thing would be to delete it. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:13, 13 February 2013 (EST)
 
:If the people who check out the criticisms find a correct article, CP will gain credibility.  But if they find that the article was deleted, they will be left to their own imaginations as to why the article was pulled. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 02:20, 13 February 2013 (EST)
 
:If the people who check out the criticisms find a correct article, CP will gain credibility.  But if they find that the article was deleted, they will be left to their own imaginations as to why the article was pulled. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 02:20, 13 February 2013 (EST)
 +
===New consensus===
 +
Does anyone object to AugustO's version?  It acknowledges the "controversy" but also states the facts. Thanks, [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 08:44, 15 February 2013 (EST)
SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,592

edits

Navigation menu