Content deleted Content added
ParthianShot (talk | contribs) →The same old problem: Reply |
ParthianShot (talk | contribs) m →The same old problem: further comment |
||
Line 344:
If the sections were reorganized as I show it in point 1, I believe would be able to remove the NPOV tags. It is not the solution of all our problems (for instance, it ramains the usage of Livius as a source, and one or two minor points), but I think we are in the good way and we don't need any mediation.--[[User:Amizzoni|Amizzoni]] 03:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
:Hi. I do strongly object to the merger that you have proposed. Here we want to convey both sides of the argument, without confusing or deceiving the readers. By having two distinctively separate sections for the each school of thought, then the reader(s) can draw his/her own conclusion. We may not live a democratic world, but let's practise it here.
:Also, since we have "[[Cyrus cylinder#Conflicting Views]]" section, I as "one of the editors" here have no objection of using a comprehensive abstract of all Kuhrt and Kuhrt-like arguments. This would allow both parties to contribute/edit their relevant sections, which are supported, by reputable sources.<span style="font-family:georgia">[[User:ParthianShot|<span style="color:#1E90FF">'''← ← P'''arthian</span><span style="color:#FF8C00"> '''''S'''hot''</span>]] [[User_talk:ParthianShot|(Talk) <span style="color:#1e90ff"></span>]]</span> 06:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | |||