Changes

Hello everyone. Seems like my modifications haven't been warmly welcomed, so I figured I'd strike up discussion as to why I think my edits are perfectly valid. I'll start with the list that conservative values are effective against:

Hello everyone. Seems like my modifications haven't been warmly welcomed, so I figured I'd strike up discussion as to why I think my edits are perfectly valid. I'll start with the list that conservative values are effective against:

There's no study, research, or form of evidence to show conservative values deter obesity. There are many examples of obese conservatives, such as Republican entertainer Rush Limbaugh, to counter the single example given, Mike Huckabee. Therefore, I omitted it under the first commandment: Everything you post must be true '''and verifiable.''' The reference for anxiety linked to a premium article by The Economist, impossible to read without subscribing to the service, and therefore lacks as a reliable source for the public. Actually, now that I think about it, that doesn't really negate the points the article makes... I suppose I'll concede this one, but I do wish to emphasize that having further reference from one or more public sources would be in the best interest of verification.

There's no study, research, or form of evidence to show conservative values deter obesity (to my knowledge, and no decent reference was given in the article). There are many examples of obese conservatives, such as Republican entertainer Rush Limbaugh, to counter the single example given, Mike Huckabee. Therefore, I omitted it under the first commandment: Everything you post must be true '''and verifiable.''' The reference for anxiety linked to a premium article by The Economist, impossible to read without subscribing to the service, and therefore lacks as a reliable source for the public. Actually, now that I think about it, that doesn't really negate the points the article makes... I suppose I'll concede this one, but I do wish to emphasize that having further reference from one or more public sources would be in the best interest of verification.

Moving on, I went ahead and improved upon the other points, such as addiction, law-breaking, and added an example reference for wastefulness (CAGW). On the topic of mental health and happiness, I changed the references, so instead of links to WorldNetDaily and FOX News (which, let's face it, some people do not consider credible), the references linked directly to the data supporting the claims (Pew Research and Gallup). I doubt a liberal is going to argue against Gallup, though they would easily dismiss WorldNetDaily. In other words, I cut out the middle man to make the article appear, on its face, more credible across a broader spectrum of ideologies, even though the WorldNetDaily and FOX articles would eventually guide a user to the data anyway. More of a PR thing than anything else, but it also didn't hurt.

Moving on, I went ahead and improved upon the other points, such as addiction, law-breaking, and added an example reference for wastefulness (CAGW). On the topic of mental health and happiness, I changed the references, so instead of links to WorldNetDaily and FOX News (which, let's face it, some people do not consider credible), the references linked directly to the data supporting the claims (Pew Research and Gallup). I doubt a liberal is going to argue against Gallup, though they would easily dismiss WorldNetDaily. In other words, I cut out the middle man to make the article appear, on its face, more credible across a broader spectrum of ideologies, even though the WorldNetDaily and FOX articles would eventually guide a user to the data anyway. More of a PR thing than anything else, but it also didn't hurt.