Talk:Racial hierarchy: Difference between revisions
→copy- paste?: new section |
|||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
==Neutrality debate== |
==Neutrality debate== |
||
Why was the neutrality debate removed from this page? From the article text, it does not look like it was resolved. The article contains text that is definitely controversial and biased and does not contain balanced references to back it up. Surely it should be removed or at least have the debate restored? [[User:Hatoulah|Hatoulah]] ([[User talk:Hatoulah|talk]]) 08:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC) |
Why was the neutrality debate removed from this page? From the article text, it does not look like it was resolved. The article contains text that is definitely controversial and biased and does not contain balanced references to back it up. Surely it should be removed or at least have the debate restored? [[User:Hatoulah|Hatoulah]] ([[User talk:Hatoulah|talk]]) 08:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC) |
||
== copy- paste? == |
|||
seriously , this is the most non encyclopedian article I have read. |
|||
I don't even know what POV is pushed here for sure , it seems as if it is a patchwork of copywriting from different authors . |
|||
it also has extreme OR issues, a collectivist slant(a race as a single entity rather than a cultural group of individuals , doing things in a personal manner as if it was a state) and is generally poorly written. I came here looking for nazi propuganda posters , I found racist\reverseracist analysis of us policy. a 100% rewrite while deleting all the gibberish is necessary. |
Revision as of 20:24, 3 April 2010
Sociology Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Ethnic groups Unassessed | |||||||||||||||
|
Neutrality debate
Why was the neutrality debate removed from this page? From the article text, it does not look like it was resolved. The article contains text that is definitely controversial and biased and does not contain balanced references to back it up. Surely it should be removed or at least have the debate restored? Hatoulah (talk) 08:26, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
copy- paste?
seriously , this is the most non encyclopedian article I have read. I don't even know what POV is pushed here for sure , it seems as if it is a patchwork of copywriting from different authors . it also has extreme OR issues, a collectivist slant(a race as a single entity rather than a cultural group of individuals , doing things in a personal manner as if it was a state) and is generally poorly written. I came here looking for nazi propuganda posters , I found racist\reverseracist analysis of us policy. a 100% rewrite while deleting all the gibberish is necessary.