Beg pardon, but the author of this incivility states at least a half dozen
times in Talk he is well aware of the sourcing; here for example
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Americans_in_the_Ven…
The question is, can he again use Wikipedia prescribed Dispute Resolution
Processess to impugn his own professional critics, not further the writing
of an encyclopedia, and get the NLG good 'ol boy network to assist his
smears
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitratio…
For those concerned about Wikipedia's credibility as a viable source, this
bares watching. I have opted to work within the project to call attention
to this abuse, and not tell my story outside.
nobs
On 1/23/06, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"Rob Smith" <nobs03(a)gmail.com> wrote in
message news:52a8cf060601221206t3fe7d93bm41bfe58f23696658@mail.gmail.com
...
[snip]
I selected this because it's the quickest to refute:
Here he refers to Prof. Klehr's work as
"outrageous McCarthyite POV
Red-baiting defamatory Blacklist
"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Americans_in_the_Venona_p…
No he doesn't.
He earlier added some commentary on the list which according to the edit
summary "added critical POV to balance page list".
This was then removed with the comment "this page is a list of names, not
a
forum to debate their significance".
The edit in question restres the commentary with the summary"Revert:
Otherwise this is an outrageous McCarthyite POV Red-baiting defamatory
Blacklist".
In other words, the words you quote above refer to our article on the
subject, not to the list itself, with the disclaimer that this description
covers a version of the list without commentary.
My phrase of the week: ingenuous cobblers [1]
HTH HAND
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
[1] definitional nitpickers can go hang, I like it and I'm taking it home
for a pet :-)