Changes

::Andy, one entry mentioning that a distant nephew committed suicide is a striking example of Wikipedia HEAVILY PROMOTING suicide? Mentioning that a man committed suicide in the beginning of the article is striking example of Wikipedia HEAVILY PROMOTING suicide?  How do those entries heavily sell people on the idea of committing suicide?  As far as saying you could find more examples that could be used as an argument to defend anything.  I think you will agree that many times the evolutionists say with more time spent evidence will likely show up.  It is really not a compelling argument.  I certainly expect better from you than I could find more evidence if I tried.  Please instead of merely moving on to other articles please let us delete this entry if you are not going to adequately support it.  I certainly don't expect you to drop everything and adequately support this entry.  However, if you are not willing to support the entry then simply erase it. If you find time later to support it you can always put it back. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:13, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

::Andy, one entry mentioning that a distant nephew committed suicide is a striking example of Wikipedia HEAVILY PROMOTING suicide? Mentioning that a man committed suicide in the beginning of the article is striking example of Wikipedia HEAVILY PROMOTING suicide?  How do those entries heavily sell people on the idea of committing suicide?  As far as saying you could find more examples that could be used as an argument to defend anything.  I think you will agree that many times the evolutionists say with more time spent evidence will likely show up.  It is really not a compelling argument.  I certainly expect better from you than I could find more evidence if I tried.  Please instead of merely moving on to other articles please let us delete this entry if you are not going to adequately support it.  I certainly don't expect you to drop everything and adequately support this entry.  However, if you are not willing to support the entry then simply erase it. If you find time later to support it you can always put it back. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:13, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

:::Andy, thank you for removing the word heavily in regards to "heavily promotes".  I really am not trying to be difficult and given that a Conservapedia editor whom I respect is agreeing with me on this issue via private letter I don't believe I am acting out of line.  With that being said PROMOTE is still a strong word.  I realize it would be a lot of work to dig through the garbage dump of Wikipedia in order to find sufficient examples to demonstrate that there are indeed examples of Wikipedia PROMOTING suicide since promote is a strong word.  And who really knows if there are any examples?  I certainly don't but I would not be surprised if there were.  However, I think your time could be better spent than digging through the garbage dump of Wikipedia. Therefore, I suggest you wait until Conservapedia gets larger and revisit the issue. You can then compare statistics and then reasonably make the claim that Wikipedia is inordinately preoccupied with the issue of suicide if their percentage of mentioning the word is much higher than ours.  Fair enough?  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:32, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

:::Andy, thank you for removing the word heavily in regards to "heavily promotes".  I really am not trying to be difficult and given that a Conservapedia editor whom I respect is agreeing with me on this issue via private letter I don't believe I am acting out of line.  With that being said PROMOTE is still a strong word.  I realize it would be a lot of work to dig through the garbage dump of Wikipedia in order to find sufficient examples to demonstrate that there are indeed examples of Wikipedia PROMOTING suicide since promote is a strong word.  And who really knows if there are any examples?  I certainly don't but I would not be surprised if there were.  However, I think your time could be better spent than digging through the garbage dump of Wikipedia. Therefore, I suggest you wait until Conservapedia gets larger and revisit the issue. You can then compare statistics and then reasonably make the claim that Wikipedia is inordinately preoccupied with the issue of suicide if their percentage of mentioning the word is much higher than ours.  Fair enough?  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:32, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

::::As per your suggestion I did a little digging at Wikipedia in regards to this matter and found some horrendous stuff. Andy, I put the following addition to the entry:  (Conservapedia will not provide citations to the more horrendous entries on this subject at Wikipedia as Conservapedia affirms the [[sanctity of life]]). I have no problem with the entry now with my reasonable addition and I think it will put more pressure on Wikipedia to change.  I will also work on expanding the [[sanctity of life]] article I just created.  I think this changes the dynamic.  Before it appeared that we had a baseless claim.  Now it appears as if Conservapedia is doing the right thing and doing it in a responsible manner.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:40, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

::::As per your suggestion I did a little digging at Wikipedia in regards to this matter and found some horrendous stuff. Andy, I put the following addition to the entry:  (Conservapedia will not provide citations to the more horrendous entries on this subject at Wikipedia as Conservapedia affirms the [[sanctity of life]]). I have no problem with the entry now with my reasonable addition and I think it will put more pressure on Wikipedia to change.  I will also work on expanding the [[Sanctity of Life|sanctity of life]] article I just created.  I think this changes the dynamic.  Before it appeared that we had a baseless claim.  Now it appears as if Conservapedia is doing the right thing and doing it in a responsible manner.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:40, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

== Wikipedia does NOT describe deceit as a "post-punk" rock album that is "austere, brilliant and indescribable." ==

== Wikipedia does NOT describe deceit as a "post-punk" rock album that is "austere, brilliant and indescribable." ==