8
edits
Changes
Talk:Arguments Against Homosexuality (view source)
Revision as of 05:34, May 25, 2008
, 05:34, May 25, 2008no edit summary
:What, and risk violating NPOV? ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 21:45, 7 May 2007 (EDT)
:What, and risk violating NPOV? ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 21:45, 7 May 2007 (EDT)
:::I did some research and there is more public demand for "Arguments against homosexuality" than for "opposition to homosexuality". I renamed the article and added some material. I have no opposition to an "opposition to homosexuality" article but I think it would be better to have an article entitled "Views on Homosexuality" first as there is a public demand for that as well based on my research. I do think that the more we serve the public interest in terms of supplying relevant and accurate information that they want the more we will be rewarded vis a vis web traffic.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:34, 28 November 2007 (EST)
:::I did some research and there is more public demand for "Arguments against homosexuality" than for "opposition to homosexuality". I renamed the article and added some material. I have no opposition to an "opposition to homosexuality" article but I think it would be better to have an article entitled "Views on Homosexuality" first as there is a public demand for that as well based on my research. I do think that the more we serve the public interest in terms of supplying relevant and accurate information that they want the more we will be rewarded vis a vis web traffic.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:34, 28 November 2007 (EST)
The viewpoints seem to be totally onesided(the belief that being gay is wrong),Because why don't you include material from groups like PFLAG to make the article more balanced?