553
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: + +
no edit summary
So, in other words, leaving things out is honest and the mark of a scholar? He boasted in his own blog he added false citations. Talk around it all you like, gentlemen, obsfucate all you like. He and his work are dishonest. Self-admittedly so. Try making this a political debate all you want, but try it on someone who isn't a professional in the field. He joined voluntairly, particpated willingly, all for only one pupose, to play "gothcha". --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 17:35, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
So, in other words, leaving things out is honest and the mark of a scholar? He boasted in his own blog he added false citations. Talk around it all you like, gentlemen, obsfucate all you like. He and his work are dishonest. Self-admittedly so. Try making this a political debate all you want, but try it on someone who isn't a professional in the field. He joined voluntairly, particpated willingly, all for only one pupose, to play "gothcha". --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 17:35, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
:Do I agree this is a bad article? Last time I read it, yes. Did I say anything about the article in my comment? Last time I read it, no. My point was that some people on this site—and you [[User:TK|TerryK]] are one of them – use “liberal” to mean “anything I don’t like”. That is not the meaning of the word “liberal”. Your claim that this article “...is mainly the work of the deceitful (now blocked) Liberal Sysop Richard” is false – the sysop Richard is not a liberal. That was my point. I said nothing about the quality of the article, nothing about the quality of Richard’s edits, nothing about Richard’s moral character, and nothing about anything else in your response. --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 18:03, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
----
----