123
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 18:
Line 18: − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→This is a great article but...
:Your lunch break clearly hasn't helped your observational abilities, as there is a link to The Beatles in the article. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 08:45, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
:Your lunch break clearly hasn't helped your observational abilities, as there is a link to The Beatles in the article. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 08:45, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Yes but you mention music greats but wont link to them? How about pink flod and the stones?
Yes but you mention music greats but wont link to them? How about pink floyd and the stones?
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 08:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 08:46, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
::Describing The Beatles, the Rolling Stones and Hunter S Thompson as 'great' and 'successes' is clearly at odds with the article, not least because they are part of the problem with their promotion of hedonistic and drug-fuelled lifestyles. By all means write a separate section on music and the arts, but do not let it be filled with the sort of hippy, summer-of-love, pink-tinted-spectacles view of the sixties that urgently needs to be debunked. And I am removing it from the 'successes' para; please do not replace it, or I will block. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 08:49, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
:::This is clearly a content dispute, one editor wants a phrase in whereas another wants it removed. There should be no blocks unless there is an edit war, in which both editors should be blocked. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 08:53, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
the Beatles are one of the greatest bands of all time. Ditto the rolling stones. Hunter Thompsons began a whole new form of journalism which is yet to be matched. Not great you say?
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 08:52, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
:Yes, and their popularity was used to promote drugs, promote irreligion, promote decadance and depravity leading to the moral and physical harm of a generation. Do you really see Hunter S Thompson as a role model? If so, the Conservapedia is scarcely the place for you. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 08:56, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
I dont see thompson a role model, I didnt suggest that once, but he is a great writer and started a form of writing that changed the face of journalism, regardless of his personal habits.
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 09:08, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
Bugler, ideally an encyclopedia doesn't decide which information it wants its readers to have by basis of ideology.--[[user:TomMoore|<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]]</sup> 11:25, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
I think both parties are at fault here. AdenJ and Bugler ''both'' engaged in a short edit war. And it's debateable that AdenJ was "lauding" the people that he mentioned in his edits. To some extent, it depends on what one means by "greats". Also, it depends on whether one should acknowledge any good points about people with bad points. Regardless, I think more (or earlier) talk and less reversion on ''both'' sides should have been done.
A couple of other comments:
* Yes, an encyclopaedia ''shouldn't'' decide what gets included on the basis of ideology, but it's probably not possible to avoid, given that every encyclopaedia does.
* Prominent people in particular ''are'' role models whether they want to be or not. In fact almost ''everyone'' is a role model to ''someone''.
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:57, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
== This is a great article but... ==
This is a very good conservative commentary on the sixties, but a commentary doesn't make a good ''encyclopedia'' article. Perhaps this should be moved to the Essay space? [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 21:22, 19 September 2008 (EDT)
:It is an outline portrait of the decade; it would give a useful context to history students, which might not be so apparent were it consigned to the desert of 'op-ed' articles. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 07:08, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
::Dare I mention that this article doesn't cite a single source?[[User:CraigC|CraigC]] 23:37, 9 December 2008 (EST)