User talk:Setlak

Seigenthaler article

Hi Setlak, was there something in particular that you feel was inaccurate about the summarized version of the Seigenthaler controversy? I think most of the editors feel that that section should be kept short within Seigenthaler's biography, as it is at most a footnote to Seigenthaler's long and distinguished career as a journalist. The John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy article, however, could definitely use some help. Have you considered editing that article instead? Kaldari 19:39, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

The short articles falsely claim that the statements were "defematory" for example, this is a legal conclusion and it is wrong. The short articles also claim that the statements included "an allegation that Seigenthaler might have been involved in the assassinations of Robert and John Kennedy." This is also false. The allegation was that Seigenthaler was THOUGHT to be involved for a BRIEF time and nothing was ever proven. By insisting on cutting down the size by a FEW LINES, you are instead adding inaccuracies. The shortest and most accurate way to put forth the issue is the version that exists in my edits, specifically: putting forth what was said instead of characterizations of what was said. As I said before, it is the difference of a few lines of text and there is really no excuse for adopting something that is misleading merely because it is a little shorter. The wikipedia controversy is only a small part of the overall article regardless, AND it is the only thing the vast majority of Americans who know his name know him for. I never heard the name Seigenthaler before the controversy and most likely neither did you. I am not editing the controversy article because if we can't portray the controversy accurately in the underlying article, the content of the detailed article is beside the point. Setlak 03:15, 17 December 2005 (UTC)