Talk:Azov Prosecutions and Amazon.com: Difference between revisions

From BoyWiki
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ambox
| image = [[Image:Information icon.png|50px]]
|info =Azov Prosecutions and Amazon.com was deleted for the following reason: It was not footnoted, ie, it made criminal allegations toward Amazon.com without documentation and was potentially libelous.  --[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] ([[User talk:Etenne|talk]]) 13:59, 1 May 2014 (CEST)}}
If Amazon.com became the target of such prosecutions, they have the resources to fight effectively.
If Amazon.com became the target of such prosecutions, they have the resources to fight effectively.


Line 15: Line 19:


[[User:User4|User4]] 23:55, 26 March 2014 (GMT)
[[User:User4|User4]] 23:55, 26 March 2014 (GMT)
----
I think this is a great topic and something you should pursue but it needs better documentation. 
See: [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]]
--[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] 23:59, 26 March 2014 (GMT)
---
Why not have Will take a look at it? He is intimately familiar with the Azov cases, and all of their details. I think my time would be better spent on something other than becoming an expert on Azov cases when an expert already is "on our team".
Don' you agree?
[[User:User4|User4]] 00:16, 27 March 2014 (GMT)
---
You really can't tell other writers on which topic they should write.... I figured that since you added this entry that it was a topic you were interested in writing about.
--[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] 00:25, 27 March 2014 (GMT)
---
"Why not have Will take a look at it?" is not telling other writers what to write about. It is just recommending that Will take a look at it. He may or may not be interested, but shouldn't he have the opportunity to make that decision for himself?
[[User:User4|User4]] 00:29, 27 March 2014 (GMT)

Latest revision as of 12:39, 1 May 2014

If Amazon.com became the target of such prosecutions, they have the resources to fight effectively.

User4 23:41, 26 March 2014 (GMT)


This article is opinion and needs to be referenced. --Etenne 23:45, 26 March 2014 (GMT)

---

I was instructed by you to stay out of the Azov pages. P~

It would be fairly simple to reference, wouldn't it? I'll bet that Will could do it in his sleep.

User4 23:55, 26 March 2014 (GMT)


I think this is a great topic and something you should pursue but it needs better documentation. See: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

--Etenne 23:59, 26 March 2014 (GMT)

---

Why not have Will take a look at it? He is intimately familiar with the Azov cases, and all of their details. I think my time would be better spent on something other than becoming an expert on Azov cases when an expert already is "on our team".

Don' you agree?

User4 00:16, 27 March 2014 (GMT)

---

You really can't tell other writers on which topic they should write.... I figured that since you added this entry that it was a topic you were interested in writing about.

--Etenne 00:25, 27 March 2014 (GMT)

---

"Why not have Will take a look at it?" is not telling other writers what to write about. It is just recommending that Will take a look at it. He may or may not be interested, but shouldn't he have the opportunity to make that decision for himself?

User4 00:29, 27 March 2014 (GMT)