Content deleted Content added
Line 215:
:In summary - this is not a hoax page. A sentence to say that the hoax proponents reference a lack of evidence is one thing, but an opening paragraph that sets it in the context of the hoax is utterly misleading. [[User:Gravitor|Gravitor]] 23:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
**OK, since the paragraph above seems to meet your requirements, I'm going to put in as the opening paragraph, especially since each of the two choices being reverted between have issues. This need not be the final version, but I think it's a good start. -- [[User:ArglebargleIV|ArglebargleIV]] 03:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
:::No, it really doesn't. It still puts the issue in the context of a discussion about the veractiy of the landing. That has nothing to do with it. Why even go there? Why not simply say the facts? [[User:Gravitor|Gravitor]] 07:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
'''Yes''' The context of this topic is the hoax discusion. I'll note again that gravitor has included a notable amount of pro hoax editorializing as well as the Sibrel quote he's so rabidly opposed to prior to other editors setting those items into a relativley NPOV context (example Bart Sibrel was simply a 'critic' too gravitor. He's dead set afgainst him being labeled anything so perjorative as documentray filmmaker) Also furing the recent AFD discussion some degree of consensus was reached to make this article a sub of the Moon Hoax article. [[User:Numskll|Numskll]] 00:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
:I don't see how that responds in any way to Gravitor's legitimate complaints. Please at least try to look as though you are ''trying'' to be constructive. [[User:Carfiend|Carfiend]] 00:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
| |||