Jump to content

Talk:Against Our Will: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Lead: tweak
SuzeBrown (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:


Neljack, everything in the lead is a summary of other material in the article. The material is definitely not a BLP violation. The statement, "but many of her arguments have been rejected or criticized by scholars" is objectively true and perfectly easy to support. If you believe that the sourcing should be made clearer, that can definitely be done. [[User:FreeKnowledgeCreator|FreeKnowledgeCreator]] ([[User talk:FreeKnowledgeCreator|talk]]) 02:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Neljack, everything in the lead is a summary of other material in the article. The material is definitely not a BLP violation. The statement, "but many of her arguments have been rejected or criticized by scholars" is objectively true and perfectly easy to support. If you believe that the sourcing should be made clearer, that can definitely be done. [[User:FreeKnowledgeCreator|FreeKnowledgeCreator]] ([[User talk:FreeKnowledgeCreator|talk]]) 02:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I am trying to update this article. And have been going around in circles. I added info in draft form, got an error message, tried to fix that. Added new material and saved it.
[[User:SuzeBrown|SuzeBrown]] ([[User talk:SuzeBrown|talk]]) 20:15, 4 June 2017 (UTC)SuzeBrown

My sources are impeccable. I offered a long cite to the material on the summary ad reception of Against Our Will in 1975 but it seems to have been rejected. [[User:SuzeBrown|SuzeBrown]] ([[User talk:SuzeBrown|talk]]) 20:15, 4 June 2017 (UTC)SuzeBrown

Revision as of 20:15, 4 June 2017

Lead

Neljack, everything in the lead is a summary of other material in the article. The material is definitely not a BLP violation. The statement, "but many of her arguments have been rejected or criticized by scholars" is objectively true and perfectly easy to support. If you believe that the sourcing should be made clearer, that can definitely be done. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to update this article. And have been going around in circles. I added info in draft form, got an error message, tried to fix that. Added new material and saved it. SuzeBrown (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2017 (UTC)SuzeBrown[reply]

My sources are impeccable. I offered a long cite to the material on the summary ad reception of Against Our Will in 1975 but it seems to have been rejected. SuzeBrown (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2017 (UTC)SuzeBrown[reply]