User talk:Shortfuse
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Personal attacks
This "small minded" person (as per your statement at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#Wikipedia:Association of 9/11 All Sides Editors) actually did go on record as saying there that he welcomes the factual, NPOV, discussion of the subject, despite the fact that he personally believes that the subject under discussion is driven almost exclusively by partisanship on the proponent side, and that there is another proposed project, mentioned on that page, that is much more balanced and less heated than your page or, so far as I can see, yourself. Please refrain from continuing these pointless, hotheaded attacks. While I do disagree with you on the subject, I welcome any neutral content you may be able to provide on it, and don't think that your recent actions, if continued, make it very likely that you will be in a position to contribute anything on the subject in the future. Calm down, please. Badbilltucker 00:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- I was speaking of no person in paticular, but rather everyone all at once and no one all at the same time. And I have gotten over it. I'll keep doing what I do but it just wont have an assocation. I'll stick it on my userpage. In fact, I have already started to do so. --Shortfuse 00:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Alternatives to your WikiProject
Hi. If you are interested in making the 9/11 articles as neutral as possible, there are some related WikiProjects:
and Wikiprojects related to that:
Rather than focusing on AfDs, I'd reccomend researching various points of view contradictory to the American government's one, especially ones that are more notable. (However, note that WP:NPOV#Undue_weight does say that, "None of this is to say that tiny-minority views cannot receive as much attention as we can give them on pages specifically devoted to them.")
More notable than conspiracy theories from countries that are predominantly Christian/pro-War on Terror might be an Islamic perspective. For example, according to someone I know who went to Egypt, the Egyptians believe that the United States government arranged for the 9/11 attacks to happen. You would have to find a reliable source for this. http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/stalinsky200409160708.asp confirms it, but is opposed to the Egyptian opinion, and I'm not sure you can trust the article to accurately portray someone else's point of view, but you could probably use it as a source for saying that the Egyptian point of view is disputed.
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP42302 provides more information on the Egyptian point of view, including (most likely translated) quotations. However, it is still from a the website of a group holding a different point of view than the Egyptians, and might not be a trustworthy source for the Egyptian point of view. It does, however, provide references to some offline sources which may be of interest to you, if you can find and translate them.
Best of luck,
Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 00:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Test of Message Box Link
Test of message box link.
[edit] Village Pump Discussion related to 9/11
Have you seen the discussions going on at the village pump --Cplot 07:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
