nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
→Reversion explained: Don't really agree with reversion, but do have concerns.
We provide the facts and let the reader decide. With reluctance I've reverted back to a more factual entry here. Feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:30, 14 February 2009 (EST)
We provide the facts and let the reader decide. With reluctance I've reverted back to a more factual entry here. Feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:30, 14 February 2009 (EST)
: I think a straight reversion was not the best way to go. There wasn't much removed by the edits, and reverting remove information that merits being in the article. Nevertheless, I did have some concerns about some of the new material.
:* Perhaps Bryan and Darrow had co-operated before, but I seem to recall reading that they had (also?) clashed before in the courtroom.
:* I don't think that the claim that Bryan was the most famous Democrat is silly at all; it's likely to be correct, although I guess that it is speculative.
:* The edits mentioned the Creation Research Society pushing for more anti-evolution laws following Scopes' conviction. The current Creation Research Society was not formed until about 40 years later; is this a mistake, or a different (earlier) group with the same name?
:* Also on the other anti-evolution laws; the edits gave the impression that the Tennessee law led the way, whereas I was of the impression that it was merely one of several such laws at the time.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:14, 15 February 2009 (EST)