Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Tfa"
(Quality of sources of information) |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:Thanks for alerting me of that. The article I read was not very clear on that. ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] <sup>[[User talk:SharonS|Talk!]]</sup> 17:20, 24 March 2007 (EDT) | :Thanks for alerting me of that. The article I read was not very clear on that. ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] <sup>[[User talk:SharonS|Talk!]]</sup> 17:20, 24 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Quality of sources of information == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I still think that if we simply disallow personal websites, our quality will greatly improve. Vandalism can be more quickly recognized, editors will go the extra 10 feet and find a quality, reliable, dependable site instead of a flashy personal site to get the same information. But when it comes to controversial issues the difficulties are even more critical. [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 19:28, 27 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 23:28, March 27, 2007
You should not post "facts" (such as that None of the founding fathers were deists) here without backing them up. --TimSvendsen 21:13, 30 January 2007 (EST)
Reply: I did. See deism. Headlines should contain bold, true statements to catch the eye and interest the reader in learning more.--Aschlafly 21:56, 30 January 2007 (EST)
skin already on MonoBook
Btw, technically the skin was already on Monobook, and changing the site default did not change it to the Conserv skin. --Ymmotrojam 14:50, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
Darwin
The statement made here is false, darwin did NOT say that, it is a quote from a book from an author that analyzed darwin's works and concluded that was how he felt. The quote is attributable to Kevles NOT darwin. It should be changed. Tmtoulouse 17:18, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
- Thanks for alerting me of that. The article I read was not very clear on that. ~ SharonS Talk! 17:20, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
Quality of sources of information
I still think that if we simply disallow personal websites, our quality will greatly improve. Vandalism can be more quickly recognized, editors will go the extra 10 feet and find a quality, reliable, dependable site instead of a flashy personal site to get the same information. But when it comes to controversial issues the difficulties are even more critical. Terryeo 19:28, 27 March 2007 (EDT)