User talk:Coalitionwatch

Kindly do not interfere with NPOV edits to the K article. I have removed today's re-additions,and reinserted those that provided addition information. please see my comments of the talk pages. Only information about what happened belongs in a WP article. Discussions of motivation and do not belong. You have as much right to edit as I do, but please take a look at the general trend of what i am doing which is to provide a stable article. I have no connections with any of the groups in this matter, and things will come out better if you let me adjust them rather than leave them to the mercy of your opponents. I will be glad to discuss my own feelings on the matter offline after I have finished editing. They do not agree with the positions of any of the editors of these pages--I am from as far outside the controversy as can be imagined. DGG 04:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you DGG, for your impartiality and effort to calm the storm. I'm going over the history here, and the inflammatory rhetoric by Padre & friends is inexcusable. Did you notice they reverted your attempt to archive their embarassing quotes? They have no shame. I'll stick around, and I'll give you free reign, but I won't let them hide the evidence, like the Iasiello quote, or the quotes from Senator Warner and 75 Congressmen. I'm glad you're here. Coalitionwatch 22:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you're reverting without discussion. Why? You're letting them hide quotes by Congressmen, Senators, 200000 Americans, and Chief of Navy Chaplains, claiming they're not NPOV? Might as well write-off WP as non-historical afterall. Coalitionwatch 23:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I intend to re-add most of it--it is simpler easier that way. The number of supporters of a particular position is secondary material, and I will continue to remove it. Its not only NPOV, but also clarity--the opinions of 3rd parties must not interfere with the account. think of it as like a newspaper article. it is possible to use footnotes as well as references, but it is a tricky technique with WP, and there are possible alternatives. I'm looking at some similarly complicated articles for hints. Let me think how to do this best. I am somewhat experienced in presenting things on the web. Multiple quotations in the text is simply not an effective way. Please comment here, to keep the discussion together. I will see it. And please edit so I only have to look once a day. DGG 23:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]