2,732
edits
Changes
Not good enough yet, Geo
(I'm adding this here as it was mentioned I should over in the ACLU/talk page.) The opinion did not prevent appeal. What probably prevents appeal is that it would be a losing case and there is a new board there. Furthermore, this was not a free excercise case, but an establishment clause case. You should also mention that the order for costs is according to federal law on constitutional rights. Further, you should link to the opinion so people can read it for themselves. It is hosted here:
(I'm adding this here as it was mentioned I should over in the ACLU/talk page.) The opinion did not prevent appeal. What probably prevents appeal is that it would be a losing case and there is a new board there. Furthermore, this was not a free excercise case, but an establishment clause case. You should also mention that the order for costs is according to federal law on constitutional rights. Further, you should link to the opinion so people can read it for themselves. It is hosted here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html [[User:Lawrah|Lawrah]] 08:21, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html [[User:Lawrah|Lawrah]] 08:21, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
: Adding a link to the opinion, which '''does''' disprove the part of the ACLU article that I've consistently told you is wrong, does not excuse the continued presence of false and misleading statements in the body of the article. I still recommend you strike the statements, or modify them. I'll help you draft them if you want.--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 00:17, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
== Mainpage, "Articles to be improved" ==
== Mainpage, "Articles to be improved" ==
Why don't you just link directly to the category from the main page via [[:Category:Articles needing major improvement|Articles to be improved]]? Would make more sense than pointing at a placeholder article that is in the category for no reason... --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 11:01, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
Why don't you just link directly to the category from the main page via [[:Category:Articles needing major improvement|Articles to be improved]]? Would make more sense than pointing at a placeholder article that is in the category for no reason... --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 11:01, 12 March 2007 (EDT)