Talk:National Writers Union
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | |
| If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. |
A couple of questions. The assertion that "most members" like the intercine warfare that has dominated the NWU's elections, what's your source?
And why no mention of the collapse of the union's membership after Tasini's departure?
I mean, really.
- Source? Personal observation. What's your source, O Anonymous One, for the post hoc attribution of the diminished numbers to the departure of Tasini? Most people I know think it's about the health insurance debacle. --Orange Mike 02:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC) (member since 1985)
- I asked for the source about the "most members" thinking that the controversial elections were good for the union, and the best you can offer is personal observation. Now, I could just as easily say that from my experience, that "most members" did not think the unending controversy was good for the union. As it says at the bottom of the page, "Encyclopeic content must be verifiable." And your personal observation doesn't cut it. Moreover, the assertion that membership declined after Tasini's departure is verifiable. NWU membership was north of 7,000 when he was president. Now there is substantially less -- approx. 2,000. These numbers while not exact, are much more easily verified than your personal observation. The chronology is as well.
