Revision as of 07:56, 26 February 2008 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,611 editsm Signing comment by 24.19.232.115 - "qu"← Previous edit |
Revision as of 08:51, 26 February 2008 edit undoHrafn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users40,179 edits WP:UNDUENext edit → |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{WikiProject intelligent design|class=Start|importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject intelligent design|class=Start|importance=Low}} |
|
|
|
|
|
==Response section== |
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to make a request for a condensation of the response section, given how incredibly outweighed the positive responses to the documentary are by negative ones. I just don't think it needs to be quite that long. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 07:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
I'd like to make a request for a condensation of the response section, given how incredibly outweighed the positive responses to the documentary are by negative ones. I just don't think it needs to be quite that long. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 07:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
:I would tend to agree, the current version gives ] weight to the Creationists's reviews. I would suggest that the Creation Safaris part be reduced to, at most, a single-sentence mention (they really aren't a prominent Creationist group), and that the other Creationist comments be compressed and the ''Nature'' review be given more space than a bare mention. <font face="Antiqua, serif">]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></font> 08:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC) |
I'd like to make a request for a condensation of the response section, given how incredibly outweighed the positive responses to the documentary are by negative ones. I just don't think it needs to be quite that long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.232.115 (talk) 07:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)