12
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 65:
Line 65: + +
→Rewritten intro
:Even if you are an original thinker with much to share, I adjure you to work harmoniously here by adhering to our rules and customs. Be sure to avoid edit wars, particularly with sysops. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:27, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
:Even if you are an original thinker with much to share, I adjure you to work harmoniously here by adhering to our rules and customs. Be sure to avoid edit wars, particularly with sysops. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:27, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
I'm wondering if some of the writers are aware that an Encyclopedia must adhere to standards...fact-based support from reputable sources and/or well articulated argument of logic. There are excellent conservative arguments (well articulated, supported by principles, etc....i.e., Standards) to discuss school prayer but simply asserting that it has been censored is not acceptable. When a writer asserts, s/he is using opinion and opinion is not ever the basis for arguing for a position. If a writer cannot find support for his/her opinion, please do not use it and do not write it. Please refer to my definition of Censorship under "What Censorship is Not". --[[User:PMiller|PMiller]] 04:54, 15 September 2011 (CST)
== The more recent examples ==
== The more recent examples ==