Content deleted Content added
References |
|||
Line 186:
In the New Zealand Section-2.3.3-the following line appears in the fourth paragraph:'' Anti-feminist mens' rights and anti-gay campaigner Chuck Bird has claimed responsibility for the offending photograph''. I can't figure out from any of the preceeding paragraphs what photograph is being referred to. [[User:R Duggan|R Duggan]] 22:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
:That comment came in with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Exclusive_Brethren&diff=77459841&oldid=77459199 this edit]. The photo they are referring to is explained in [http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3800052a6160,00.html this ref], but not described in the article. [http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3807602a10,00.html This article] seems to refute the suggestion that he was responsible for the photo - rather that he got the photo from 'a contact', and passing them onto a newspaper. I say we take out the sentence altogether unless anyone can piece together the news stories. [[User:Chovain|Chovain]] 05:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
== References ==
I'm going to look into improving the references in this article (It seems drastically under-referenced at the moment). While I'm at it, would anyone mind if I changed to [[WP:CITET|CITET]]-style referencing? [[User:Chovain|Chovain]] 22:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
| |||