Content deleted Content added
Line 127:
None of this has anything to do with LaRouche, and I suspect that 172 is deliberately trying to muddy the waters by repeatedly insisting that it does. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-Defamation_League&diff=31129292&oldid=31122050 Here] is the version of "ANC" section that sat in the article for a very long time before being removed by [[User:JJay]] on December 13. He expressed the view that this version was poorly sourced, and I agreed. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-Defamation_League&diff=32040910&oldid=31978551 Here] is the new version that I wrote to replace it, subsequently removed by 172. See the earlier discussion [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anti-Defamation_League#ANC here]. --<font color ="darkred"><font face ="georgia">[[User:Herschelkrustofsky|HK]]</font></font> 04:32, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
:Well, sorry for opening up the can of worms with LaRouche. I will not mention him again in this discussion. Still, the material is baised against the ADL and misleading for the reasons that I stated above. As I stated earlier, there is no reason to reinsert it other than to induce the reaction, "Ooh, the ADL supported apartheid!" [[User:172|172]] 07:56, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
::On the contrary, the reason not to remove it is precisely to ''inform'' the reader that the ADL acted in various ways against the ANC. If the effect of this is to suggest that the ADL ''ideologically supported apartheid'', that would be wrong ... but it isn't. It's more illustrative of the very complexity and nonobviousness of partisan group politics.
::I'm rather concerned by the almost prurient attitude you seem to be suggesting other editors have here. "Ooh, the ADL supported apartheid!" would be an irresponsible and unworthy approach for anyone to this article. Please try to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] here. --[[User:Fubar Obfusco|FOo]] 08:26, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
| |||