Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,563
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − − Line 113:
Line 111: + + + +
→Earnings: response
== Please note edits! ==
== Please note edits! ==
Why does the sentence under the section Earning says "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00." when the citation given states $168,070,886? Also, the usage of the word "bilk" is subjective. Even though his films are not proper "documentaries", it doesn't mean he defrauded the public. I'm removing the sentence. [[User:ATang|ATang]] 10:20, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
Why does the sentence under the section Earning says "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00." when the citation given states $168,070,886? Also, the usage of the word "bilk" is subjective. Even though his films are not proper "documentaries", it doesn't mean he defrauded the public. I'm removing the sentence. [[User:ATang|ATang]] 10:20, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
:(A) Asked and answered on the page; (B) the sentence specically says "worldwide," the chart specificall cites "US Gross; (C) the link provided specifically references the same language, idea, and concept. (D) the term "bilked" is commonly understood to mean defraud, cheat, or swindle, thwart, frustrate, or hoax.
:Now, if you absolutely demand reputable and credible citations to support the claim, "Michael Moore's films have bilked the public worldwide in excess of $200,000,000.00," that certainly is no large demand, and we'd being only too willing to do so. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:44, 26 July 2007 (EDT)