nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: +
Talk:Scientific establishment (view source)
Revision as of 22:55, October 18, 2008
, 22:55, October 18, 2008Tentative support
: I only suggested that because you seemed to want to control the content. I can move it back to an article if you'd like, but then you have to let others have their input too, as it says below every edit box. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:34, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
: I only suggested that because you seemed to want to control the content. I can move it back to an article if you'd like, but then you have to let others have their input too, as it says below every edit box. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:34, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
::What if we linked it as a see also? [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 13:31, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
::What if we linked it as a see also? [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 13:31, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
::: On the one hand, I still don't think that's appropriate for an encyclopaedia, but on the other hand, given that Conservapedia is not a typical encyclopaedia (e.g. having essays and debates, even the collaborative nature of the Wiki is not typical of traditional encyclopaedias, though normal in Wiki ones), perhaps that's not a bad suggestion. This would set a bit of a precedent, so I'll go along with that if there is further support and no or minimal opposition. I assume that in the "see also" section it will be apparent that it is an essay being linked to. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 18:55, 18 October 2008 (EDT)