123
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 28:
Line 28: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→This is a great article but...
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 08:52, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
[[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)
: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)