Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
207 bytes added ,  05:00, June 29, 2007
Line 22: Line 22:  
Citation is used to stand for facts; not opinions.  The value-word "attacked" is not supported in the cites.  I honestly don't think we should cover this issue at all if it's that divisive.  I don't want to break with you, but seriously, what she did was wrong.  We should either handle it neutrally - "E. Edwards called in to express concern," with value-neutral adjectives & adverbs - or not cover it at all.-[[User:Phoenix|Phoenix]] 00:58, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
 
Citation is used to stand for facts; not opinions.  The value-word "attacked" is not supported in the cites.  I honestly don't think we should cover this issue at all if it's that divisive.  I don't want to break with you, but seriously, what she did was wrong.  We should either handle it neutrally - "E. Edwards called in to express concern," with value-neutral adjectives & adverbs - or not cover it at all.-[[User:Phoenix|Phoenix]] 00:58, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
 
:Well, I'm not an Edwards fan, and in this episode what Coulter had said just was not said first.  If Edwards had said something that despicable about Cheney, if he had looked the other way or agreed with what Bill Maher said about Cheney, then this article is not going to look as though Coulter and only Coulter was the bad girl here.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:59, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
 
:Well, I'm not an Edwards fan, and in this episode what Coulter had said just was not said first.  If Edwards had said something that despicable about Cheney, if he had looked the other way or agreed with what Bill Maher said about Cheney, then this article is not going to look as though Coulter and only Coulter was the bad girl here.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:59, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
 +
Karajou, I see that concern.  Therefore, I address it by making a neutral fact-statement.  Is my solution acceptable?  Notice it passes judgment on no-one.-[[User:Phoenix|Phoenix]] 01:00, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
167

edits

Navigation menu