This edit war is getting ridiculous. There is room in the article for both sides. I toned your edits down a little and made them fit better with the paragraph.
"However, other -like authors Mearsheimer and Walt- will point out"
If it is from a source, that source should be sited after the statement. I left a spot for you you to add the citation. If you have issues with reverts in the future, please communicate with the user before reverting back. -- Roccyraccoon 18:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
There is no edit war. I think Doonhammer removed my edits by mistake. As for me, I didn't removed anything. I added some perspective to put both sides of the story in an article that is cruelly lacking balance and perspective. Arromdee deleted them twice for 2 different "reasons". If you think my additions are not fair, please explain me why. Particularly what is wrong with the statement that "an isolated incident cannot be evidence of anti-semitism of a whole population" ? Francophobia, like all prejudices, stems from unfair generalizations, and this wiki article does exactly that: justify unfair generalizations. It is crucial that this process be exposed somewhere within the article, for a minimum of perspective. By the way, thanks for your lecture, but the person who removes additions should be the one that communicate in the first place. Tocquevil 07:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
This edit war is getting ridiculous. There is room in the article for both sides. I toned your edits down a little and made them fit better with the paragraph.
"However, other -like authors Mearsheimer and Walt- will point out"
If it is from a source, that source should be sited after the statement. I left a spot for you you to add the citation. If you have issues with reverts in the future, please communicate with the user before reverting back. -- Roccyraccoon 18:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
There is no edit war. I think Doonhammer removed my edits by mistake. As for me, I didn't removed anything. I added some perspective to put both sides of the story in an article that is cruelly lacking balance and perspective. Arromdee deleted them twice for 2 different "reasons". If you think my additions are not fair, please explain me why. Particularly what is wrong with the statement that "an isolated incident cannot be evidence of anti-semitism of a whole population" ? Francophobia, like all prejudices, stems from unfair generalizations, and this wiki article does exactly that: justify unfair generalizations. It is crucial that this process be exposed somewhere within the article, for a minimum of perspective. By the way, thanks for your lecture, but the person who removes additions should be the one that communicate in the first place. Tocquevil 07:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)