71
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 419:
Line 419: + +
Conservapedia talk:Commandments (view source)
Revision as of 08:36, April 25, 2007
, 08:36, April 25, 2007→Credentials
I do think that if someone feels that they are more of an expert on a topic then a particular editor, they should be able to prove it. It is illigitimate to question someone's creds without showing yours.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]]<sup>[[User_talk:palmd001|talk]]</sup> 13:16, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
I do think that if someone feels that they are more of an expert on a topic then a particular editor, they should be able to prove it. It is illigitimate to question someone's creds without showing yours.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]]<sup>[[User_talk:palmd001|talk]]</sup> 13:16, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
::Such credentials should be on their user page, correct? Having yours in your name "MD" does no good. Besides, if someone has no credentials but can provide good verifiable sources that counter your claim, it should also be valid as well. Some people like me (tooting my own horn?) are very well read, but have only credentials in a certain area (some have none!). [[User:Hengineer|Hengineer]] 04:36, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
==Gossip vrs. legitimate scandal information==
==Gossip vrs. legitimate scandal information==