User talk:Whisperwolf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Forgive me for attempting to contact you this way. I'm unfamiliar with proper Wikipedia protocol; so, I don't know how to contact you directly (or, if I should try). I trust you will be able to remove this note -- why should it be archived?

When looking up an entry on Jason BeDuhn, I discovered you seem to have recently engaged in a discussion regarding wording of a statement you thought should be "wrote" rather than "found." Apparently you acquiesced to the wording: "his analysis led him to conclude."

It strikes me that such a statement still assumes facts not in evidence. Although one wants to believe that writers analyze and then conclude, such is not always the case. Certain writers conclude and then analyze. I am NOT accusing DeDuhn of this; I am merely pointing out that the possibility exists. Why not stick to your guns: "he wrote" -- not "concluded" and certainly not "his analysis led him to conclude." Perhaps "wrote" really is the most neutral statement.

Regardless of whether he "found" "concluded" "discovered" or "set out to prove" something or other -- no question can be raised that he "wrote" such and such.

Rod.Bias at asu.edu -- probably better to reach me at Rod.Bias at cutlip.org -- spam filters may snag you at asu.

Thanks, I'll email you at the given address and we can talk. Whisperwolf (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)