26
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 32:
Line 32: + +
→"Witchcraft" article content
A properly structured article would be infinitely preferable to the current weird rant. Where is the history? What does the Bible actually say? Where are the references to scripture? How has witchcraft been viewed through the ages? Properly researched and written, this has the potential to be a great historical article. [[User:Fingermouse|Fingermouse]] 07:41, 24 May 2007 (EDT)
A properly structured article would be infinitely preferable to the current weird rant. Where is the history? What does the Bible actually say? Where are the references to scripture? How has witchcraft been viewed through the ages? Properly researched and written, this has the potential to be a great historical article. [[User:Fingermouse|Fingermouse]] 07:41, 24 May 2007 (EDT)
Yes, just be sure to put the Bible-oriented point of view in *first*- considering this IS Conservapedia after all- but both part´s lenght should be about the same, as to not discriminate between either point of view. A subtle (or not-so subtle) conservative bias is OK, as long as there IS another point of view present, too. Thus, the reader is given several points of view, and they can thus construct their own. [[User:FreakyM|FreakyM]] 07:48, 24 May 2007 (EDT)
==Something I Noticed==
==Something I Noticed==