Talk:Industrial Workers of the World: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
(Created page with ""The personal views of CivWiki editors or the public are irrelevant." What does this even mean, and what does it have to do with the historical record being unevidenced, unsu...") |
m (added text) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
"The personal views of CivWiki editors or the public are irrelevant." |
"The personal views of CivWiki editors or the public are irrelevant." |
||
What does this even mean, and what does it have to do with the historical record being unevidenced, unsupported, and disputed by others? There are no "personal views" when it comes to the history of something, it either happened or it did not, and there is no evidence to suggest anything written happened, because there is no reference or source to back it up. Hence the why the dispute was added to both sections. |
What does this even mean, and what does it have to do with the historical record being unevidenced, unsupported, and disputed by others? There are no "personal views" when it comes to the history of something, it either happened or it did not, and there is no evidence to suggest anything written happened, because there is no reference or source to back it up. Hence the why the dispute was added to both sections. I'd imagine a primary source, the owner of something, would know if something sounds out of place or blatantly wrong - that is not a "personal view" that is just history. |
||
To "Ferro" |
To "Ferro" |
||
Revision as of 00:11, 23 July 2021
"The personal views of CivWiki editors or the public are irrelevant."
What does this even mean, and what does it have to do with the historical record being unevidenced, unsupported, and disputed by others? There are no "personal views" when it comes to the history of something, it either happened or it did not, and there is no evidence to suggest anything written happened, because there is no reference or source to back it up. Hence the why the dispute was added to both sections. I'd imagine a primary source, the owner of something, would know if something sounds out of place or blatantly wrong - that is not a "personal view" that is just history.
To "Ferro"