19:0919:09, 19 April 2006diffhist+129
Joseph Sobran
If we're going to put all this other stuff about him then the thing that makes sig to most Wikireaders should be listed in the headline in addition to his works
23:5223:52, 16 April 2006diffhist+87
LewRockwell.com
Rogerman's right here...no reason not to provide clarification..the fact that North has called for the stonings isnt explicitly in the source either so why remove this...it gives the reader more info
17:3117:31, 15 April 2006diffhist−375
Lyndon LaRouche
The citation that was listed went to a blank page...so that information will be kept off this page until proper documentation can be put forth...as per Wikipolicies...sorry Rouchers
04:0204:02, 22 March 2006diffhist+141
Stephan Kinsella
Not sure that DickClarkMises should be the one editing the article as he is an associate of Kinsella's organization, The Mises Institute
03:2803:28, 22 March 2006diffhist−320
Joseph Sobran
DJac75..you have violated Wikipedia's 3RR rule. Please avoid vandalizing articles in the future. Cheers, TheDookieMan
22:3022:30, 21 March 2006diffhist−246
Joseph Sobran
DickClarkMises, please consider your position. I've looked through the history here, and it seems that the Wikipedia community doesn't believe your version is a fair portrayal of Sobran.
17:3817:38, 20 March 2006diffhist−241
LewRockwell.com
rv...Kinsella is not notable..nor is this POV information appropriate for this page...lets keep it copesitic...please
17:1817:18, 20 March 2006diffhist−241
LewRockwell.com
DickClark, I'd suggest that you take a loot at the other discussions regarding Kinsella. However notable he is in your eyes, he is not notable as per Wikipedia's guidelines.
17:1617:16, 20 March 2006diffhist−311
Joseph Sobran
DickClark, I'll conceed the point with regards to accused rather than identified. But the rest of DJac's insertions have to go----, it's completely POV and counterfactual, and counter to Wikrules
15:4115:41, 20 March 2006diffhist−308
Joseph Sobran
My reading is evidentally different from yours DJac, because I see Buckley as being fully clear on why he fired Sobran---the reason being what he describes as "Sobran's anti-semitic prejudice".
01:0301:03, 20 March 2006diffhist−241
LewRockwell.com
I've looked over the history here and it's clear the decision was made to keep this discussion limited. DickClarkMises, if you want to pump up Lew Rockwell, do it on your blog, not here.
19:0919:09, 19 April 2006diffhist+129
Joseph Sobran
If we're going to put all this other stuff about him then the thing that makes sig to most Wikireaders should be listed in the headline in addition to his works
23:5223:52, 16 April 2006diffhist+87
LewRockwell.com
Rogerman's right here...no reason not to provide clarification..the fact that North has called for the stonings isnt explicitly in the source either so why remove this...it gives the reader more info
17:3117:31, 15 April 2006diffhist−375
Lyndon LaRouche
The citation that was listed went to a blank page...so that information will be kept off this page until proper documentation can be put forth...as per Wikipolicies...sorry Rouchers
04:0204:02, 22 March 2006diffhist+141
Stephan Kinsella
Not sure that DickClarkMises should be the one editing the article as he is an associate of Kinsella's organization, The Mises Institute
03:2803:28, 22 March 2006diffhist−320
Joseph Sobran
DJac75..you have violated Wikipedia's 3RR rule. Please avoid vandalizing articles in the future. Cheers, TheDookieMan
22:3022:30, 21 March 2006diffhist−246
Joseph Sobran
DickClarkMises, please consider your position. I've looked through the history here, and it seems that the Wikipedia community doesn't believe your version is a fair portrayal of Sobran.
17:3817:38, 20 March 2006diffhist−241
LewRockwell.com
rv...Kinsella is not notable..nor is this POV information appropriate for this page...lets keep it copesitic...please
17:1817:18, 20 March 2006diffhist−241
LewRockwell.com
DickClark, I'd suggest that you take a loot at the other discussions regarding Kinsella. However notable he is in your eyes, he is not notable as per Wikipedia's guidelines.
17:1617:16, 20 March 2006diffhist−311
Joseph Sobran
DickClark, I'll conceed the point with regards to accused rather than identified. But the rest of DJac's insertions have to go----, it's completely POV and counterfactual, and counter to Wikrules
15:4115:41, 20 March 2006diffhist−308
Joseph Sobran
My reading is evidentally different from yours DJac, because I see Buckley as being fully clear on why he fired Sobran---the reason being what he describes as "Sobran's anti-semitic prejudice".
01:0301:03, 20 March 2006diffhist−241
LewRockwell.com
I've looked over the history here and it's clear the decision was made to keep this discussion limited. DickClarkMises, if you want to pump up Lew Rockwell, do it on your blog, not here.