This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dunkelza (talk | contribs) at 00:06, 31 August 2005 (Comment on Researcher99 spamming the Talk:Polygamy page.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:06, 31 August 2005 by Dunkelza (talk | contribs) (Comment on Researcher99 spamming the Talk:Polygamy page.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Okay, Researcher99 just spammed the Talk:Polygamy page by posting his RFC response on THAT page as well. I removed it from that inappropriate place, but will leave his response here, where it belongs. This is another example of Researcher99 hijacking legitimate article discussion to grind his personal ax. Such activity is highly counterproductive and MUST STOP.
Also, for the record, I am not upset that Researcher99 doesn't like my citations, but rather that he doesn't present any NPOV evidence of his own. I agree that my citations aren't always the best quality, as it is difficult to find entire bodies of text that show group marriage as being included in the broad category of polygamy. Instead, I cited study guides and other academic snippets where group marriage is shown as a subcategory of polygamy. In the process, I have consistenly maintained an NPOV. We should all be avoiding (as much as possible) information provided by political groups like "Christian Polygamists", "Anti-Polygamists" , and "Polyamorists".
Researcher99 has instead insisted on using the definitions provided by said Christian Polygamists, rather than scientific definitions from Anthropology, Sociology, or Zoology. I believe that Researcher99 should focus that POV work on a Christian Polygamy article and bring only appropriate scientific evidence to the general NPOV polygamy article. Dunkelza 20:08 August 30, 2005 (EDT)