This is an old revision of this page, as edited by F=q(E+v^B) (talk | contribs) at 22:05, 26 June 2012 (archive extremley long terminated discussions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:05, 26 June 2012 by F=q(E+v^B) (talk | contribs) (archive extremley long terminated discussions)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Mathematics B‑class High‑priority | ||||||||||
|
Physics B‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Archives | ||||||||||
Index
|
||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Lede
The version reverted to here reads more clearly for the lede. IRWolfie- (talk) 20:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Disagree...per Stanford University's much clearer -- and vastly more authoritative -- cited article on Bell's Theorem'. --FormerNukeSubmariner (talk) 11:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Agree. The original longstanding consensus version is much clearer. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
- Comment. The old version of the lead is the consensus version. It has been stable for over 5 years, meaning that many editors have implicitly endorsed it (see WP:CON and WP:BRD). If this were a vote, not only would we have the implicit consensus that already existed, but in addition it is two to one against the new change. FNS, if you want this to be included, then you have to make your case here and convince somebody else that you are right. Sławomir Biały (talk) 21:24, 26 June 2012 (UTC)