renameuser, Administrators
5,600
edits
Changes
→Guess What Needs Moderating Again?
:I hope this closes the hate-Ben-Johnson portion of the week, and the moderators -- having heard the evidence -- will green light sourced statements over unsourced ones. Then I can write about something I enjoy (the WR) not something I do not enjoy writing about (me). And maybe OW can return to its purpose of presenting well-written, factually correct articles, not assaulting its authors.--[[User:Willibrord|Willibrord]] 21:06, February 17, 2009 (UTC)
::Alright, some things that I can see that are able to be resolved.
::If it's not feasibly able to be attended by members of the public (i.e. if it's not advertised), it's not a church, it's private prayer.
::That doesn't stop that usage from being an approved usage.
::Blogs - and, whatever else you do on your own time - are neither here nor there. We're all about the articles. While a side tangent into why a person thinks the way they do is often amusing, it invariably snaps either into bowdlerism or ad hominem.
::If there's a source, the line stays, particularly in an article so desperately requiring sources. That seems a fairly useful rule. Really, as far as hedging goes, counter-sources merely introduce a 'so-and-so claims that (text) (source)'. — by [[User:Pistevo|<font color="green">Pιs</font><font color="gold">τévο</font>]] <sup>''[[User talk:Pistevo|<font color="blue">talk</font>]]'' ''[[User talk:Pistevo/dev/null|<font color="red">complaints</font>]]''</sup> at 22:34, February 17, 2009 (UTC)