Talk:Robert B. Spencer: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Mike18xx (talk | contribs)
Mike18xx (talk | contribs)
Line 550:
 
::I understand the desire to avoid an edit war. Perhaps another editor could supply a one or two sentence summary for the introductory paragraph. It isn't necessary to explain who these people are (that's what Wikilinks are for), but I would want to see a brief summary for the substance of their objections and defenses. This might seem like an obvious iteration to editors who already know the personalities and terms of debate, but it is far from obvious to a reader who lacks that background. [[User:Durova|Durova]] 13:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I fail to see the need for a "criticism" section to beging with, seeing as Spencer isn't a politician with any enforced policies warranting such treatment in a short encyclopedia article. I've seen ifit before: All it's going to do is devolve into a "sounding board" for smears by critics of dubious merit dredged out of the grungy cellers of Google archives. CAIR, for instance: Why are they credible enough for citation, given a number of its directors are in jail? ....It'll be just like it was before last January.--[[User:Mike18xx|Mike18xx]] 17:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)