Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) at 00:09, 5 January 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please stop the malicious reverts of this article. Fred Wills was a close friend of LaRouche for 20 years, and this is undisputed. The reverts are petty and childish. --Caroline 21:22, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

My revertions are not malicious. I have no reason to act with malice. If you can provide third-party evidence that, in 1976 when he made the speech, Wills was promoting LaRouche's proposals, then I have no problem with you inserting it. But, following the Arb Comm's ruling, you are not allowed to insert LaRouche promotions unless you can show that they are backed up by independent sources. All Misplaced Pages users are authorized to remove LaRouche "original research" (meaning unattributable to anyone but the LaRouche organization). Slim 21:44, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

I have added the NPOV tag because it appears that Slim Virgins deletions are motivated by his anti-LaRouche POV, rather than by a desire to make this article accurate and complete. When Fred Wills was alive, he proudly spoke of his speech to the UN as being the presentation of LaRouche's proposal from the previous year. I would like to know whether Slim Virgin has any real basis for disputing this.

Also, Slim Virgin has deleted the material about Fred being on the original board of the Schiller Institute when it was founded in '84, as well as the title "the honorable Frederick Wills." Was that deliberate? Is he also disputing Wills' board membership? Or the title "honorable"? Weed Harper 21:48, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Weed, I have no problem at all with that material, or anything else, being in the aticle if it is true and substantiated. The other three users (Herschel, C Colden and 64.30.208.48) have been banned for a week for re-inserting material into this article that came only from the LaRouche organization: in particular the claim that it was LaRouche's ideas on debt that Wills presented to the UN, rather than his own or someone else's. If you have third-party attribution for any of those claims, please go ahead and insert them with the attribution. It is not for us to find the basis to dispute the claims. It is for you who wants to insert information to show that it is true (or, at least, that it is accepted by other sources).

Many editors, myself included, are very tired of this constant LaRouche issue and upset by it. Please stay here and be a Misplaced Pages editor rather than a LaRouche promoter. I can't argument about these issues any more, as I've spent too much time on them already. Slim 00:01, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

Slim, it is my understanding that an NPOV tag may not be removed until all parties to the dispute agree. I have replaced it. However, I also re-wrote the article to balance it in a way that I hope will satisfy all parties. If everyone is happy now, by all means, remove the tag. Weed Harper 14:47, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Since there has been no more editing, I took the tag off. If you are dissatisfied, put it back on. Weed Harper 15:58, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I deleted the titles Honorable and Doctor. Virtually all government officials can be called 'honorable' (believe it or not), so indicating his government service is sufficient (unless we want to go and edit every politician to add the title). What was he a doctor of? Where did he get the degree? If it was an honorary degree then it shouldn't be included. If it was not a medical degree, and if Wills did not use it himself as a title, then we should only reference it in the text. I can't find any biography of him, only mentions. Does anyone know anything about his education? -Willmcw 23:22, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nothing in this article has been verified, Will; not the text of the speech, not that he was an important leader for LaRouche. He was a government official, and, according to the Schiller Institute, he was involved with them. Wills is dead and so cannot be asked to confirm. The article should not exist in my view. The point of it, for the LaRouche supporters, was that they wanted to insert the claim that Wills' speech on debt relief was based on LaRouche's ideas. That claim was removed because there was no evidence to support it. There wasn't even evidence that Wills had heard of LaRouche at the time he made the speech, if he did make it. Slim 00:09, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)