Talk:SUV/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Larry_Sanger (talk) No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Your rewrite is fine; it just isn't significantly different in content. Saying "this is horribly biased" and then re-using 95% of it seems incongruous. Having been on the internet for 15 years, I merely note (but don't care about) things I consider insulting... others might not be so thick-skinned. --[[Belltower]] |
Your rewrite is fine; it just isn't significantly different in content. Saying "this is horribly biased" and then re-using 95% of it seems incongruous. Having been on the internet for 15 years, I merely note (but don't care about) things I consider insulting... others might not be so thick-skinned. --[[Belltower]] |
||
Huge bias can be added, or removed, by small changes. In newspapers, for instance, bias is often very subtle, conveyed by the addition of a half-dozen words here and there, and the omission of some relevant fact that could be stated in one sentence--that sort of thing. What you did in the original article is essentially write an argument (admittedly, supported :-) ) against the use of sports utility vehicles. That's not what an encyclopedia is for. I think the article still has that problem, actually, but I'm not sure what do about it. --[[LMS]] |
|||
Revision as of 17:57, 1 September 2001
With the exception of the line about SUVs being buglies (which I didn't add, but didn't delete), I don't see a whole lot of bias difference between your rewrite of SUV and my version. I suppose there was the word rationalize in my write-up, but other than that I find your summary, frankly, insulting and wrong. --Belltower
Then you are easily insulted. I don't see what you find wrong about it, though. Maybe you would care to explain. If you want me to explain why I rewrote it as I did, I can do that too. --Larry Sanger
Your rewrite is fine; it just isn't significantly different in content. Saying "this is horribly biased" and then re-using 95% of it seems incongruous. Having been on the internet for 15 years, I merely note (but don't care about) things I consider insulting... others might not be so thick-skinned. --Belltower
Huge bias can be added, or removed, by small changes. In newspapers, for instance, bias is often very subtle, conveyed by the addition of a half-dozen words here and there, and the omission of some relevant fact that could be stated in one sentence--that sort of thing. What you did in the original article is essentially write an argument (admittedly, supported :-) ) against the use of sports utility vehicles. That's not what an encyclopedia is for. I think the article still has that problem, actually, but I'm not sure what do about it. --LMS