Changes

I don't know anything about this organization, but this article is awful.  It refers to someone as "Brock" before using his full name (later revealed to be David Brock, in a quote).  It should say who he is first.  Like I said, I don't know, but I was reading and got confused.  Also, the quote about him at the bottom is suspicious, since it is highly biased coming from someone who is suing him.  Without knowing anything about the merits of the lawsuit, it seems to insinuate that the person filing the lawsuit is correct.  It would be better if the article looked at the actual facts relevant to the lawsuit (if relevant to the article).  In short, even a conservative article about a liberal group should be factual.  --[[User:TMills|TMills]] 15:49, 1 June 2007 (EDT)

I don't know anything about this organization, but this article is awful.  It refers to someone as "Brock" before using his full name (later revealed to be David Brock, in a quote).  It should say who he is first.  Like I said, I don't know, but I was reading and got confused.  Also, the quote about him at the bottom is suspicious, since it is highly biased coming from someone who is suing him.  Without knowing anything about the merits of the lawsuit, it seems to insinuate that the person filing the lawsuit is correct.  It would be better if the article looked at the actual facts relevant to the lawsuit (if relevant to the article).  In short, even a conservative article about a liberal group should be factual.  --[[User:TMills|TMills]] 15:49, 1 June 2007 (EDT)