Talk:Common Era
You deleted the contents of CE and BCE to redirect them to your new pet article. Why? I don't see what they contained being merged here. ħuman
06:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- I see most or all of wound up here, nevermind. But this still would better have been discussed on their talkpages. No blood no foul... ħuman
06:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am unrepentant as a matter of principle, even though I probably should have mentioned something on the talk pages first. Still: bollocks to you, as they say Across the Pond. Bollocks!--
talk
06:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am unrepentant as a matter of principle, even though I probably should have mentioned something on the talk pages first. Still: bollocks to you, as they say Across the Pond. Bollocks!--
[edit] Balance issues in the criticism section
"There are several arguments against the usage of the Common Era system. Pretty much all are from conservative Christians stating that the removal of AD and BC is "oppression" of their religion - as if enforcement of AD and BC isn't repression of anyone else's religion or religious calendar."
This passage is not appropriate. As written the passage comes across as amateurish and emotional. Not only does it contradict the rest of the section where various logical criticisms of the BC/BCE system are presented, it also fails to provide a citation for the claim that the majority of criticism of BC/BCE comes from "conservative Christians." If that is true, please provide a citation to substantiate that claim. Also, supposing an appropriate source can be found, please reconstruct the sentence to reflect a more neutral and academic tone.