Revision as of 22:17, 27 December 2005 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 edits Reich← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:26, 7 January 2006 edit undoFrankZappo (talk | contribs)93 edits →ReichNext edit → | ||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Reich== | ==Reich== | ||
Hi, I left a note on the talk page explaining why I reverted the intro, although I had lots of other reasons e.g. unexplained deletion of details. An edit that extensive made by an anon without explanation and no sourcing will almost always be reverted. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 22:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | Hi, I left a note on the talk page explaining why I reverted the intro, although I had lots of other reasons e.g. unexplained deletion of details. An edit that extensive made by an anon without explanation and no sourcing will almost always be reverted. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 22:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
==Re: Falsifiability and Validity== | |||
Sorry for the long delay in responding to your comment on my Talk page. I just responded - also on my Talk page, for continuity. ] 22:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:26, 7 January 2006
Well put!
"I believe that controversial topics should be treated from every point of view, instead of looking for an unattainable consensus."
I agree completely, and I will have the remember this quote for the future since it IS so well put. However, I can't agree with you comment on changing cat. "Pseudoscience" to something else. :) -- Sjschen 14:21, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Reich
Hi, I left a note on the talk page explaining why I reverted the intro, although I had lots of other reasons e.g. unexplained deletion of details. An edit that extensive made by an anon without explanation and no sourcing will almost always be reverted. SlimVirgin 22:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Re: Falsifiability and Validity
Sorry for the long delay in responding to your comment on my Talk page. I just responded - also on my Talk page, for continuity. FrankZappo 22:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)