Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FR Wikipedia entry
12/25/13 | Awestruck

Posted on 12/25/2013 1:01:05 PM PST by Awestruck

Am I the only one to notice that most of the Wikipedia entry about FR is one big hit piece? Or does it not matter because it is editable? Don't meant to be dense...just curious.


TOPICS: Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: freerepublic; wikipaedia; wikipedia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-191 next last
To: Star Traveler
The screaming liberals at wiki will not allow a correction to stand.

However I do admire your innocence and naivete.

Merry Christmas.

101 posted on 12/25/2013 5:23:46 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

The last paragraph has a bit about JimRob’s decree against Romney supporters. I can attest that his decree was issued much earlier than April 2012. I would guess it was sometime in mid 2011, but could have been earlier.


102 posted on 12/25/2013 5:27:38 PM PST by Hoodat (Democrats - Opposing Equal Protection since 1828)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Little Bill; Tax-chick

Merry Christmas Bill!

Size 4? You like old fat guys with no money, drive old trucks and dress up like Shrek for Toys For Tots?(


103 posted on 12/25/2013 5:31:18 PM PST by RaceBannon (Lk 16:31 And he said unto him If they hear not Moses and the prophets neither will theybe persuaded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

Never thought of looking there,
The section on Martin O Malley and Bob Ehrlich (Maryland) is interesting given what transpired here between them.


104 posted on 12/25/2013 5:36:27 PM PST by sickoflibs (Obama : 'If you like your Doctor you can keep him, PERIOD! Don't believe the GOPs warnings')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

Dummy Underground is home to 50% of the United States’ pedophile and welfare fraudster population.


105 posted on 12/25/2013 5:40:46 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

Wikipedia doesn’t have a citation for their claim, the one listed is a 404 page.


106 posted on 12/25/2013 5:46:00 PM PST by ansel12 ( Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW; Star Traveler; NoCmpromiz
TBL was and is an anti-FReeper site.

I just checked TBL. It looks like they have a new database as of May, with older topics having been purged.

And according to the rules, the current owner does not allow discussion of other forums: "Do not bring issues or feuds from other forums here."

107 posted on 12/25/2013 5:55:19 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

There might have been some confusion here, when that paragraph was written, because the “reference” that is given for this is dated October 31, 2011.

That’s something that can be corrected by way of their own reference used.


108 posted on 12/25/2013 5:56:48 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

That’s a problem with the Internet, in general - as I’ve got references right now that I’ve documented for some item or fact - which are “404” ... too ... :-) ...


109 posted on 12/25/2013 5:59:31 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Star Traveler
Wikipedia doesn’t have a citation for their claim, the one listed is a 404 page.

Well then..

It would seem that the lack of a viable citation would be sufficient reason for anyone who says they can get it altered to do so.

So maybe instead of circling a dead horse here, they should put money in mouth, go there (that would be that storehouse of all the world's not-always-true information WikiP.D.A.) and prove their claim to be able to fix it...

Don't ya think?

Just my $0.02 worth.

I will wait for the edit...

110 posted on 12/25/2013 6:00:54 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz

You said — “I will wait for the edit...”

As I said earlier, you give me the citation for Jim Robinson’s statement and I’ll make the edit.

That happens to be what I’m waiting for ... :-) ...


111 posted on 12/25/2013 6:04:27 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

Why bother? ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSMBC, etc. all do hit pieces on FR. Wikipedia is known as a lib site.


112 posted on 12/25/2013 6:06:42 PM PST by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

That’s a good thing as it almost destroyed them.


113 posted on 12/25/2013 6:08:54 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: caver
Wikipedia is known as a lib site.

A lot of FReepers claim liberals are stupid but fail to notice that they control all major internet portals....

114 posted on 12/25/2013 6:10:37 PM PST by nascarnation (Wish everyone see a "Gay Kwanzaa")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz; ansel12; Star Traveler; EveningStar

Since their citation is on a defunct forum (I think TBL moved) I believe it can and should be removed.


115 posted on 12/25/2013 6:11:50 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

“A lot of FReepers claim liberals are stupid but fail to notice that they control all major internet portals....”

Good point! Liberals are not stupid, although quite a few middle class liberals are just plain ignorant. They believe the drive by media because they are too lazy to search for the truth. On the other hand, liberals are driven by hatred of conservative values and then that leaves the remainder who are just plain power hungry and evil.


116 posted on 12/25/2013 6:14:11 PM PST by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: caver

Liberals take advantage of the fact that most people are stupid.


117 posted on 12/25/2013 6:14:48 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz

Why not post that expression of disinterest and passivity directly to that person, rather than to me?


118 posted on 12/25/2013 6:18:39 PM PST by ansel12 ( Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
That happens to be what I’m waiting for ... :-) ...

Here's the deal...

YOU said you could get it edited when others claimed it can't be done. YOU were given a valid reason to edit the WikiP.D.A. article for listing a nonexisting source.

NOW you are saying you can't do it for the stated valid reason, you require another "proof". WikiP.D.A. cites a nonexisting source. As such, that fact invalidates the citation in question. Thus no OTHER source is required to generate an edit. Once edited (which, remember, YOU claimed you could accomplish), if someone else comes up with a valid source to reinsert that comment, they can re-edit the edit that you claim you can make but haven't.

So.. prove you can get it edited.

And since you were provided with a valid reason to edit, if you plan to continue replying with the same mantra, we will conclude that you are just blowing smoke or just maybe being, for want of a better word, a semi-equine beast.

Again, PROVE that you can get it edited.

I'm still waiting to see the edit.

119 posted on 12/25/2013 6:27:05 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW; NoCmpromiz; ansel12; Star Traveler; EveningStar

You said — “Since their citation is on a defunct forum (I think TBL moved) I believe it can and should be removed.”

The problem here is the same problem that I have with my own references and documentation. I’ve got references for things I’ve looked up before (to document something), and later on the website owner has dumped it. Now, I DO HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION and it’s definitely true for the things that I’ve looked up in the past - so I know it doesn’t become “untrue” simply because some other website owner decided to dump it.

The same is true on Free Republic, too, by the way. I’ve got documentation for some things discussed that Free Republic has now dumped (everything was dumped at Free Republic before a certain date). But again, I do have the documentation, even if Free Republic decided not to keep it.

FURTHERMORE, I can go back to some older Free Republic articles and find that the references to the article SHOWS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THERE right now. However, just because the originally referenced article, for which the thread is based IS NO LONGER THERE Free Republic does not delete the thread on discussing that article and what it said — simply because the original website owner decided to delete it. It was documented and remains true as it was when it was originally posted.

Now what I said I would do is change that on Wikipedia as soon as I received the citation of Jim Robinson’s statement - on that issue. I’m told that he did make the statement - so I’m waiting for that citation to his statement so I can make the Wikipedia change,


120 posted on 12/25/2013 6:31:53 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
rather than to me?

Sorry.. I posted as a reply to your comment (note that I did include the person in question) as a means of directing said person's attention to the obvious (which I had already noted here ) that was ignored.

Sorry if I unintentionally caused you bother..

121 posted on 12/25/2013 6:34:14 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

A dead link is not valid documentation.


122 posted on 12/25/2013 6:37:02 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler; DJ MacWoW; NoCmpromiz; ansel12
Regarding lost links: Don't forget the Wayback Machine
123 posted on 12/25/2013 6:40:09 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Even if it’s on Wayback that doesn’t answer why they used an anti-FReeper site rather than directly from FR.............unless, of course, the statement’s a lie meant to smear FR. Right?


124 posted on 12/25/2013 6:49:53 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

I don’t know why they went through TBL instead of using a direct link.


125 posted on 12/25/2013 6:52:18 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

FReepers know why.


126 posted on 12/25/2013 6:53:18 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

It appears that they were right ... I just received the citation ...

Quote from Jim Robinson ...

Well, I just didn’t have many options left. Most all other large conservative sites had already stopped resisting. The other candidates and potential candidates: Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum, even Palin, DeMint, West, Walker and just about anyone who would potentially be the miracle candidate to come out of the convention had already endorsed Romney. Most of the conservative pundits and talkers endorsed him including Coulter, Malkin, Hannity, Rush, Levin, Reagan; Ingraham, et al. Even the pro-life, pro-family sites were endorsing him. Even the Christian sites. And many of the tea party groups. I was beginning to feel like the Lone Ranger here. It was pretty damn drafty with my butt hanging out there like that with only a few holdout sites left and our dear loyal supporters here on FR. And I was seriously losing sleep over this. My opinion of Romney has not changed one iota, but I now think it is more important that we wipe out the Marxists if we can this election and take on the RINOs in the next battle. My personal opinion is not important, especially if we’re just a small group of devout resistance fighters and holdouts. Guess I’ll reluctantly have to join Palin, Levin and the others and go all in with our last choice, last chance candidate. It sucks but there it is. But if he pulls a McLame on us, we’re pretty much done for. Praying for the best.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2920626/posts?page=778#778


127 posted on 12/25/2013 7:03:39 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar; DJ MacWoW; NoCmpromiz; ansel12

Okay, this solves it — there’s no need to make a correction on Wikipedia, because they’re correct.

Quote from Jim Robinson ...

Well, I just didn’t have many options left. Most all other large conservative sites had already stopped resisting. The other candidates and potential candidates: Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum, even Palin, DeMint, West, Walker and just about anyone who would potentially be the miracle candidate to come out of the convention had already endorsed Romney. Most of the conservative pundits and talkers endorsed him including Coulter, Malkin, Hannity, Rush, Levin, Reagan; Ingraham, et al. Even the pro-life, pro-family sites were endorsing him. Even the Christian sites. And many of the tea party groups. I was beginning to feel like the Lone Ranger here. It was pretty damn drafty with my butt hanging out there like that with only a few holdout sites left and our dear loyal supporters here on FR. And I was seriously losing sleep over this. My opinion of Romney has not changed one iota, but I now think it is more important that we wipe out the Marxists if we can this election and take on the RINOs in the next battle. My personal opinion is not important, especially if we’re just a small group of devout resistance fighters and holdouts. Guess I’ll reluctantly have to join Palin, Levin and the others and go all in with our last choice, last chance candidate. It sucks but there it is. But if he pulls a McLame on us, we’re pretty much done for. Praying for the best.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2920626/posts?page=778#778


128 posted on 12/25/2013 7:07:38 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

That’s from August. He didn’t say he was voting for him. He did say that no one would get slapped or banned for backing Romney. Jim said that living in California, it made no difference who he voted for. And THAT link I do not have.


129 posted on 12/25/2013 7:11:11 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz

You said — “I’m still waiting to see the edit.”

You would have been waiting a very long time for that edit ... LOL ...

And this is a good example why you should never base “facts” on your own “political persuasion”. The “facts” exist apart from a political viewpoint and/or persuasion. SO ... no matter what you “prefer” you should always fact-check.

It appears that they were right ... I just received the citation ...

Quote from Jim Robinson ...

Well, I just didn’t have many options left. Most all other large conservative sites had already stopped resisting. The other candidates and potential candidates: Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Santorum, even Palin, DeMint, West, Walker and just about anyone who would potentially be the miracle candidate to come out of the convention had already endorsed Romney. Most of the conservative pundits and talkers endorsed him including Coulter, Malkin, Hannity, Rush, Levin, Reagan; Ingraham, et al. Even the pro-life, pro-family sites were endorsing him. Even the Christian sites. And many of the tea party groups. I was beginning to feel like the Lone Ranger here. It was pretty damn drafty with my butt hanging out there like that with only a few holdout sites left and our dear loyal supporters here on FR. And I was seriously losing sleep over this. My opinion of Romney has not changed one iota, but I now think it is more important that we wipe out the Marxists if we can this election and take on the RINOs in the next battle. My personal opinion is not important, especially if we’re just a small group of devout resistance fighters and holdouts. Guess I’ll reluctantly have to join Palin, Levin and the others and go all in with our last choice, last chance candidate. It sucks but there it is. But if he pulls a McLame on us, we’re pretty much done for. Praying for the best.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2920626/posts?page=778#778


130 posted on 12/25/2013 7:12:52 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Well, that’s the way I read it ... but if you have something different - I’ll be interested in seeing it.

BUT ... since this is his quote and since I do have this - I’m going on this statement right now.


131 posted on 12/25/2013 7:15:31 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

The problem is I work the FReepathon which means a lot of reading. I don’t know if the Boss said it in response to someone or if it was a later thread. I just know he said it.


132 posted on 12/25/2013 7:19:01 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW; Star Traveler

Sounds like he said it to me, DJ. And I don’t blame him. I felt the same way. I’m tired of the GOP “turn” system. We need fresh blood. But we go with what we have and hope for the best.


133 posted on 12/25/2013 7:21:02 PM PST by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

If he said differently in a later thread, then he’s contradicting his earlier statement. Now, I believe people can change their mind, however that also has to be shown that he “did change his mind”.

Until that is shown that he changed his mind (if he did) ... what we have right now is this ...

“Guess I’ll reluctantly have to join Palin, Levin and the others and go all in with our last choice, last chance candidate. It sucks but there it is. But if he pulls a McLame on us, we’re pretty much done for. Praying for the best.”


134 posted on 12/25/2013 7:24:41 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
I'm not sure what you mean by "he said it". Said which?

There was discussion of voting for all offices but Presidential. Seems to me it was in that discussion that he said it didn't matter whether he voted for President or not. Being in NY, I'm in the same boat.

135 posted on 12/25/2013 7:25:48 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

because we are too stupid to edit the post at Wiki and manage continued smearing the conservatives take from leftists.


136 posted on 12/25/2013 7:29:51 PM PST by Chickensoup (we didn't love freedom enough... Solzhenitsyn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

I know what I read. I just can’t find it.


137 posted on 12/25/2013 7:30:51 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

I knew about that, but the Wikipedia says a little more, and is not sourced.

I was well aware of JR having to change his public position on the Romney ticket for freepers nationally, but I wasn’t aware of this statement, and am still not, yet.

“”However, just nine days before election day 2012, Robinson backtracked, admitting he was voting for Romney and a straight GOP ticket. [56]””


138 posted on 12/25/2013 8:13:26 PM PST by ansel12 ( Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
It appears that they were right ... I just received the citation ...

Really???

Reminder.. This is the WikiP.D.A. quote "However, just nine days before election day 2012, Robinson backtracked, admitting he was voting for Romney and a straight GOP ticket. [56]" with the [56] directing to the nonexistant link so the statement is unsourced.

Your 'proof' post does not satisfy that statement. It is not a post from nine days before the election (since it was posted in August) and it does not say that he is voting for Romney and a straight Repub ticket. What it does say is that JR can no longer actively oppose MythRomney because he seems to be the lastIn addition, the TBL post reportedly linked in the nonexistant link was also posted in August.

Someone has a strange calendar. And reads more into a statement than is there. For your proof to be valid, produce one (from FR) that actually says JR will vote for Romney and a straight Repub ticket. Extra points awarded if it is actually from nine days before the election.

If you can produce such 'facts' then you would be correct that 'they' were right. If not, 'they' are mistating something, either date, fact, or both and you still have valid reason to edit the WikiP.D.A. article.

Still waiting for real facts not interpretations from your political viewpoint and/or persuasion. In the absence of same, I’m still waiting to see the edit.

139 posted on 12/25/2013 8:20:21 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz
because he seems to be the last

should read "because he seems to be the last one standing."

140 posted on 12/25/2013 8:35:25 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz

It sure sounds like it fits to me ...

“Guess I’ll reluctantly have to join Palin, Levin and the others and go all in with our last choice, last chance candidate. It sucks but there it is. But if he pulls a McLame on us, we’re pretty much done for. Praying for the best.”

I was given a post from August 20 and they have another post from October 27 ... both showing that Jim Robinson changed his mind.

Mine is an earlier post - so - they say he changed his mind 9 days before the election and I say he changed his mind 78 days before the election.

I personally don’t care whether he changed his mind 9 days before the election or 78 days before the election.

The important fact for me is that he changed his mind before the election - and thus that fact has been proven true.

Perhaps you would like to make that change from “9 days before” to “78 days before”.


141 posted on 12/25/2013 8:57:04 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

My reference was from August 20, which is 78 days before the election. Their reference was from October 27 which is 9 days before the election.

It’s apparent that Jim Robinson said more about what he was doing 9 days before the election, than he said 78 days before the election.

Just like I was given the quote for 78 days before the election, I’m sure someone can give me the quote for 9 days before the election.


142 posted on 12/25/2013 9:04:56 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I should also clarify what I understand you’re still not sure about — I take that to be the “straight GOP ticket”. Is that the remaining question?


143 posted on 12/25/2013 9:10:17 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

LOL

That’s great

Stay warm.


144 posted on 12/25/2013 9:51:58 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

This is very specific, “”However, just nine days before election day 2012, Robinson backtracked, admitting he was voting for Romney and a straight GOP ticket. [56]””

I would like to see the source for that, I imagine it was posted here at FR, Wikipedia should link us to it.


145 posted on 12/25/2013 9:53:58 PM PST by ansel12 ( Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Now ... you already know he changed his mind, so I’m guessing that you’re wondering if it was 9 days before ... or 78 days before. Is that right?

And then, I’m also guessing that you’re wondering if he voted a straight party-line ticket. Is that right?

Those are the only two things I can see — (1) the number of days before, and (2) party-line ticket or not.


146 posted on 12/25/2013 10:01:16 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

Good Lord man, are you thick? At this point you have no idea how JR voted.

This is very specific, “”However, just nine days before election day 2012, Robinson backtracked, admitting he was voting for Romney and a straight GOP ticket. [56]””

I would like to see the source for that, I imagine it was posted here at FR, Wikipedia should link us to it.


147 posted on 12/25/2013 10:28:43 PM PST by ansel12 ( Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Good Lord man, are you thick?

Would seem that way wouldn't it?

148 posted on 12/25/2013 10:31:03 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
It sure sounds like it fits to me ...

Really???

Ok... let's do a little review since you seem to have, accidentally or purposefully bypassed the facts. The discussion is that WikiP.D.A. is not quite truthful. The statement was made that if you edit one of their pet articles they will change it back. You came along and said someone should edit it since it's not all that difficult and if 'we' would supply 'you' with proof 'you' would undertake the task of proving 'us' wrong by editing the WikiP.D.A. article yourself.

As a reminder.. This is the WikiP.D.A. quote "However, just nine days before election day 2012, Robinson backtracked, admitting he was voting for Romney and a straight GOP ticket. [56]" with the [56] directing to the nonexistant link so the statement is unsourced. As it stands WikiP.D.A. is in error for two reasons. First they offer a nonexistent link as proof of their statement. Then they erroneously relate the time and contents of the statement, based on the link they provide. WikiP.D.A. is thus claiming that at the unavailable link we will find proof of their statement "However, just nine days before election day 2012, Robinson backtracked, admitting he was voting for Romney and a straight GOP ticket."

It has previously been noted that your 'found' link from FR dating to August does not say what WikiP.D.A. says it says, nor is the time frame correct since by most calendars August is considerably more than nine days from November. It has been noted that the now nonexistent TBL post that WikiP.D.A. cites as proof of the disputed statement was also posted in August, so the now nonexistent post from TBL could never have been a proper citation for the statement as reported by WikiP.D.A. The now nonexistent post on TBL from August does point to the FR post that you provide as proof of your claim. The problems with this proof have already been cited even though you cannot seen to grasp the differences in content and date.

Since I found the fingerprint of the now nonexistent TBL post, I'm sure you can too to observe that I am relating this properly, especially as to the date of posting as contradicting its use to prove a statement of 'nine days before'.

Now you add "and they have another post from October 27 ..." but you have provided no substantiating link, only a vague 'they'. Remember that saying is not citing except in straw arguments - then it's only valid if you can get someone to believe it. There are fools here on FR saying that they have photos of Ison heading towards Earth (one of the proofs 'they' offer was a much photoshopped photo of the Pleiades by the way so 'theys' don't get any credence here. Your mileage may vary.)

Now, heeping in mind the previous facts, please note that as the content now stands on WikiP.D.A. it is erroneous for the previously noted reasons. This substantiated the original claim that WikiP.D.A. is not quite truthful. That discussion is no longer on the table. Now suppose you were suddenly to find a post on FR that does state exactly what the WikiP.D.A. article says with a time frame that is close to or even exactly calendar correct, would that change the original premiss? (You know - WikiP.D.A. lies, er, is not quite truthful..)

Well in case you can't figure that out, the correct answer is "No". Why? Because WikiP.D.A. maintains an article with improper attestation and ascertation. (Reminder: WikiP.D.A. is not a forum presentation, but represents itself as encyclopaedic. If it were a forum, corrections are made by subsequent posts. In an encyclopedia, corrections are made by editing the erroneous text, so pointing out a straw argument that some older posts on a forum such as, oh, lets say FR, are now in error is not the same as making a similar claim about an encyclopedia.) IF you are able to find such a post that fits both the content parameters and the time parameters, you, based on your professed ability to edit WikiP.D.A. articles with easy are urged to do so. IF proper corrections are made, all that would be accomplished is that WikiP.D.A. is no longer lying, er, being less than truthful in THIS situation.

OUR original premise has been proved. I suggest that you get on the line promptly with your TBL buddies and dig up the proper information. It might after all be out there, but either way, WikiP.D.A. is in error. Unless and until you find 'their' post - which by implication you do not have access to - from FR on Oct. 27 or thereabouts and undertake to correct the WikiP.D.A. account, YOUR braggadocio of being able to edit with ease a WikiP.D.A. article will be regarded as torofeces. Unless and until you perform the above, and supply such information, no further communication will be necessary

149 posted on 12/25/2013 10:31:14 PM PST by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: NoCmpromiz

The only thing I see that you’re bringing up is (1) the 9 days versus 78 days before the election ... and ... (2) voting the straight party-line ticket (or not).

The original thing that started this conversation for me was whether Jim Robinson changed his mind. It was either he did change his mind about voting for Romney - or he didn’t.

It’s already been shown that he did change his mind about voting for Romney - so that settles what started this particular conversation for me

NOW ... if you want to start up some more issues about (1) 9 days or 78 days before - and - (2) straight party-line or not party-line ... well ... have at it.

I personally don’t care — as I already got my original issue solved - as to whether Jim Robinson changed his mind about voting for Romney — he did change his mind.


150 posted on 12/25/2013 10:46:53 PM PST by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-191 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson