Talk:Public image of George W. Bush: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
AuburnPilot (talk | contribs) →Merge from Criticism on George W. Bush: agree; no merge |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==graph needs update== |
|||
new poll shows 28% approval [[User:Southleft|Southleft]] 04:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Forked and then ignored== |
==Forked and then ignored== |
||
Ah, so right after I move stuff back into here, I discover that the reason this has barely been touched in two weeks is because it was all copied back into [[George_W._Bush#Criticism_and_public_perception]]. I don't know what to do now other than deleting most of the intro (which was never sectioned to begin with) from this article and turning it into an article solely on polling data. Any objections?--[[User:Kchase02|Kchase]] [[User_talk:Kchase02|T]] 05:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC) |
Ah, so right after I move stuff back into here, I discover that the reason this has barely been touched in two weeks is because it was all copied back into [[George_W._Bush#Criticism_and_public_perception]]. I don't know what to do now other than deleting most of the intro (which was never sectioned to begin with) from this article and turning it into an article solely on polling data. Any objections?--[[User:Kchase02|Kchase]] [[User_talk:Kchase02|T]] 05:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 04:13, 7 May 2007
graph needs update
new poll shows 28% approval Southleft 04:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Forked and then ignored
Ah, so right after I move stuff back into here, I discover that the reason this has barely been touched in two weeks is because it was all copied back into George_W._Bush#Criticism_and_public_perception. I don't know what to do now other than deleting most of the intro (which was never sectioned to begin with) from this article and turning it into an article solely on polling data. Any objections?--Kchase T 05:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Merge from Criticism on George W. Bush
Both articles should be merged in one. There's really no point in having them separated since they have practically the same content. --Hetfield1987 (Wesborland | James Hetfield) 21:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- They have been deliberately split in the past, as people thought the two concepts where to different which resulted in an incoherent article. I suggest we leave it like this, both articles are reasonably sized and well sourced and serve a purpose on their own. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 20:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. Both articles serve a separate purpose as daughter articles of George W. Bush. - auburnpilot talk 21:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)