Talk:Bloed, Bodem, Eer en Trouw: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:35, 19 September 2006

Griffin is not a neutral source. I am not even sure what the reason is for his comment to be entered here. If you are going make an implication, you have to use a reputable and neutral 3rd party source, otherwise it cannot be entered into Wikipedia. Intangible 15:22, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Griffin isn't used as a source here. --LucVerhelst 18:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is. That la Libre (incorrectly) reprints his statements, does not make this less a primary source. Intangible 20:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Griffin's quote isn't used for the information in it, but because of the act of saying that he feels close to the Vlaams Belang. Not the information in his quote is relevant, but the act itself. Surely you can see that.

That's why he isn't used as a source here.--LucVerhelst 20:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All fun and well, but the Vlaams Belang didn't even exist back then. Your above notion makes the quote irrelevant to this article. Either way it is out. Intangible 20:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 :::Griffin's quote isn't used for the information in it, but because of the act of saying that he feels close to the Vlaams Belang. Not the information in his quote is relevant, but the act itself. Surely you can see that.
 :::That's why he isn't used as a source here.--[[User:LucVerhelst|LucVerhelst]] 20:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
+::::All fun and well, but the Vlaams Belang didn't even exist back then. Your above notion makes the quote irrelevant to this article. Either way it is out. [[User:Intangible|Intangible]] 20:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)