User talk:Guymontague
Hello, my friend. I reiterate what I said in the message just above. I noticed your correction to the Pat Tillman article. There was some objection to using the cussing, and the solution after a bit of discussion by a few editors was to just replace the to-some-very-objectionable words with ellipses because, as I put it at Talk:Pat_Tillman#Hew_to_the_source, the important thing was Richard's statement that Pat was not religious — not that Richard did some cussing as he said so. This seemed to be logical since, to repeat, the section is about Pat's moral and ethical position. Richard's statement, even abridged as it is, gives very strong support to the idea that Pat was not religious. If you would like to reopen the discussion, please do so at Talk:Pat_Tillman. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:32, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Re. Pat Tillman, and the quotation/censorship debate,
In order to clarify, I am asking users to briefly, clearly state which version of the quotation they support or oppose.
Please see Talk:Pat_Tillman#Clarifying_for_consensus
I am sending this message to everyone who has previously participated in the discussion; I do not wish to make any assumptions of the previous opinion.
I want to show clear consensus, so the issue can be resolved and edit-warring can be prevented.
Thanks,
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Chzz (talk) at 00:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC).