1,352
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 146:
Line 146: + + + +
→McCain Edit
Will you be making the same change for the Barack Obama article that you made to the McCain article? I'm not sure what your reasoning was for taking it out of the intro, and then out of the article completely. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 14:20, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
Will you be making the same change for the Barack Obama article that you made to the McCain article? I'm not sure what your reasoning was for taking it out of the intro, and then out of the article completely. --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 14:20, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
:What does this have to do with the Barack Obama article? If you don't understand why things like that don't belong in the lead, I will refer you to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LEAD this]. Is is a good summary of what should compose that which we call a "lead". Keep in mind it is not conservapedia site policy and others are not obliged to do what it says, but it is a good guidline to follow. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 14:25, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
:What does this have to do with the Barack Obama article? If you don't understand why things like that don't belong in the lead, I will refer you to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LEAD this]. Is is a good summary of what should compose that which we call a "lead". Keep in mind it is not conservapedia site policy and others are not obliged to do what it says, but it is a good guidline to follow. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 14:25, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
::My point in remarking was I would hope that you would do the same cleanup of the Obama lead as you did with the McCain lead. I'm sure if I attempted to do the same cleanup, I'd find myself banned. Therefore I was hoping you would stay consistent and clean up both leads. Consider this my request for you to do so, or permission to do so without being banned.
::Also, in regards to the McCain gaffes--it was important to make note of those gaffes, or at least as much as the notation of the gaffes that have been posted on the Obama article (i.e. referring to 57 states when he meant to say 47 states). --[[User:Jareddr|Jareddr]] 14:30, 12 June 2008 (EDT)