Talk:Curley v. NAMBLA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I removed the link to User:Adam_Carr/Documents1 because it is the same as one of the PDF's pointed to. -- Fplay 02:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I put it back and put a selfref around it. Still not the best solution. -- Fplay 18:07, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

The full text of these documents can be seen here.

Moved self-ref here from article body. --DanielCD 00:23, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National Review article

That National Review article is highly biased and is not a good reference. I'm not saying I disagree with it, I really don't care. But opinion pieces are not proper references. I'm going to ask for a third opinion though. It might be ok if there is some trustworthy info. --DanielCD 03:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

"External links" are not the same as references. National Review is a notable source, albeit one with a POV. -Will Beback 03:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I think you are right. It does have a bias, but the info being used seems sound. Thanks for being so astute. --DanielCD 04:02, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I also did some cleaning up. Some of the facts need further verification, as the two men seem to have had different parts, though both are quite guilty. However the article made it seem like both were equal in all parts. One aided, and the other did the sexual stuff.

I also removed the long list of names and such, as I thought that was a little bit of an overkill. If someone wants them replaced, it might be done in a way that it doesn't dominate the article and fuzz the focus. The names are relevant, and they are mentioned. But it seemed like information overkill. Anyway, comments on my edits are always welcome. --DanielCD 04:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

From a deleted section of the article: "In the application, Bejin is listed as the 'President/Vice President' of Zymurgy" Zymurgy? Are these guys in the beer-brewing business too?? --DanielCD 04:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)