Difference between revisions of "Betteridge's law of headlines"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(+1)
(+1)
Line 30: Line 30:
 
*[http://veritasnews.com/did-american-arbitration-association-arbitrator-have-a-conflict-of-interest/ "Did American Arbitration Association arbitrator have a conflict-of-interest?"]
 
*[http://veritasnews.com/did-american-arbitration-association-arbitrator-have-a-conflict-of-interest/ "Did American Arbitration Association arbitrator have a conflict-of-interest?"]
 
*[http://www.wdtv.com/wdtv.cfm?func=view&section=5-News&item=Could-You-Be-Charged-For-Taking-Photos-Of-National-Forests-18430 "Could You Be Charged For Taking Photos Of National Forests?"]
 
*[http://www.wdtv.com/wdtv.cfm?func=view&section=5-News&item=Could-You-Be-Charged-For-Taking-Photos-Of-National-Forests-18430 "Could You Be Charged For Taking Photos Of National Forests?"]
 +
*[http://www.teapartycrusaders.com/u-s-politics/non-citizens-decide-november-election/ "Could non-citizens decide the November election?"]
  
 
==References==
 
==References==

Revision as of 18:12, October 26, 2014

Betteridge's law of headlines states that headlines that end with a question mark can be safely answered "no".[1]

Possible examples

References