Difference between revisions of "User talk:PF Fox"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Stop being snide)
(Remove unnecessary redirect)
 
(49 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Block Warning: Do not make edits that subtly change the meaning of the article like you did on fascism, or you will be blocked. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 23:48, 7 March 2007 (EST)
 
  
−
== Fascism ==
 
−
 
−
A sentence which reads this way: "Allowing only information which supports the far-left state is a common means of fascist control. This is especially pertinant in websites such as Wikipedia which allow liberal-only information through."
 
−
 
−
Combined with a later sentence in the same entry which reads like this: "Communism represents the extreme left of the political spectrum, while Fascism represents the extreme right."
 
−
 
−
...renders the entire entry meaningless. If Fascism represents the "extreme right", how can "allowing only information which supports the far-left state" be "a common means of fascist control?"
 
−
 
−
==Nazi article==
 
−
Conservatism and ultra-conservatism ''are'' right-wing.  There is also a radical fringe on the far, far right that is neither conservative nor even ultra-conservative.  Nazism falls there so it is a correct statement to say Nazis were not conservative.  Not everything on the right wing is conservative.  Libertarianism falls on the right side of the spectrum too but it is a very distinct thing from conservatism. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 16:32, 11 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
==205==
 
−
Before you begin using what WP:ATTFAQ describes as obsolete and depracated cource, I invite yo to review this document. [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/%22Operations_of_the_MGB_Residency_at_New_York%2C_1944-45%22]
 
−
 
−
And what specific point of mine is this supposed to address? Please be specific.
 
−
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 15:23, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
:Ellen Schrecker has deprecated herself, not to mention other obsolete information; since 1995, all the previous 50 years of published material needs to be reviewed.
 
−
:Have you read the Moynihan Commission Report?  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:27, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
On specifically what points did she deprecate herself? And what did I post from those other sources that proved to be untrue?
 
−
No, I have not read the Moynihan Commission report. What specifically does it say that renders what I've posted here invalid?
 
−
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 15:41, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
==Please do not remove Talk page comments==
 
−
Please do not remove Talk page comments.  [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Joseph_McCarthy&diff=next&oldid=32278]  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:46, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
If I did this it was not deliberate, and I apologize. This system is still new to me. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 15:49, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
:Transcripts may have a proper place; but you've filled it up with Schecker material which she herself has deprecated, and the evidence of trolling I predicted around that article, cited above, you had removed from the Talk page.  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:12, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
The majority of my material did not come from Schrecker, as my own notes indicate. And please tell me what I'd posted that she "deprecated." I'd also like to know how the transcripts from the McCarthy hearings -- including the audio -- qualify as "deprecated" material.
 
−
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 16:14, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
==McCarthy==
 
−
 
−
What exactly would you like to add? Post it on my talk page.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 02:31, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
== Archives ==
 
−
 
−
I noticed you just added comments to [[User talk:Aschlafly/Archive4]]. This isn't appropriate, seeing as how it is an archived discussion. It's history. Editing it is like, going back to the civil war and letting the south win! --<font color="#0000CC" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']]</font><sup><font color="00FFAA">[[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]]</font></sup> 12:50, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
Sorry. I am trying to put things in their right places, and my comments were a continuation of that discussion. I'll move them someplace more recent. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:52, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
== Liberal? ==
 
−
 
−
Can you [[User:Richard/Conservapedia_Liberal_List#Suspected_Liberalpedian | confirm your liberal status]]?
 
−
 
−
==[[Salvador Allende]]==
 
−
 
−
I may have been unclear on the talk page, based on your response. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Salvador_Allende&diff=70726&oldid=70714]
 
−
 
−
I was asking if stipulating a single standard helps us write the article. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 15:57, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
 
−
 
−
==Civility==
 
−
 
−
[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Ed_Poor&diff=73073&oldid=73068 This] makes two snide remarks in a row.
 
−
 
−
Such remarks are derogatory in a malicious, superior way. [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/snide]
 
−
 
−
Perhaps it's just a customary way of speaking where you come from, but I dislike the tone of it. I'd rather you say something pleasant and respectful and to the point, like:
 
−
*I feel the burden of proof is on you, not the other editor. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 16:10, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
 

Latest revision as of 10:05, May 21, 2008

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:PF_Fox&oldid=457649"