| Revision as of 17:49, 27 July 2014 editHerbxue (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,206 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:21, 15 August 2014 edit undoHerbxue (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,206 edits →Dismissive, insulting: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
| https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=617731968 | https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=617731968 | ||
| ::bobcatmeow on NPOV | ::bobcatmeow on NPOV | ||
| == Dismissive, insulting == | |||
| https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Acupuncture&curid=159422&diff=621284481&oldid=621256431 | |||
Revision as of 04:21, 15 August 2014
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Acupuncture&diff=prev&oldid=617190003
- Editor dismisses concerns about POV wording and misuse of editorial source by asserting fact without in text attribution
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Acupuncture&diff=prev&oldid=617468469
- Editor asserting POV wording against previous compromise (and misusing editorial to assert fact in WP's voice)
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Acupuncture&diff=617524986&oldid=617518624
- Editor dismisses entire subject as without any value, but continues to edit dismissed subject.
- Arguments against depicting "acupuncture is pseudoscience" as fact in WP's voice
- Editor insists on presenting opinions as fact, showing obsession with the label pseudoscience
- Logos gets it
- Editor claims strong consensus but does not give evidence
- Zambelo gets it
- bobcatmeow on NPOV
Dismissive, insulting
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Acupuncture&curid=159422&diff=621284481&oldid=621256431