209
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 13:
Line 13: +
Talk:Liberal wordiness (view source)
Revision as of 17:47, November 17, 2009
, 17:47, November 17, 2009→Deletion
::If it's in [[Liberal style]], then it doesn't need it's own article. This is embarrassing. It needs to be deleted as a work of parody. Now. -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|<sub>Discussion</sub>]] 12:41, 17 November 2009 (EST)
::If it's in [[Liberal style]], then it doesn't need it's own article. This is embarrassing. It needs to be deleted as a work of parody. Now. -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|<sub>Discussion</sub>]] 12:41, 17 November 2009 (EST)
:::It exists in Liberal style as a bullet point, #2: "a high word-to-substance ratio, as in using many words to say little of substance," which could use better development. If User:Epic416 has created the article as a mockery, he's done a pretty poor job, as it simply restates what User:Aschlafly has been saying for some time: liberals talk a lot without saying anything. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 12:44, 17 November 2009 (EST)
:::It exists in Liberal style as a bullet point, #2: "a high word-to-substance ratio, as in using many words to say little of substance," which could use better development. If User:Epic416 has created the article as a mockery, he's done a pretty poor job, as it simply restates what User:Aschlafly has been saying for some time: liberals talk a lot without saying anything. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 12:44, 17 November 2009 (EST)
::::I think the point you make about Kerry and Clinton is more a case of personal opinion than an objective analysis of their use of language. [[User:DWiggins|DWiggins]] 12:47, 17 November 2009 (EST)