Talk:William Nelson

This guy sounds like a real cuckoo. I wonder when Andrew Schlafly will move to Budapest to avoid the "politics of education"? 23:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

If this stuff is all quotes, can someone box them up like I did the first one, before we are tempted to start "editing" them? 23:16, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Is this page a work in progress or intentionally just text cribbed from other sources? 23:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think there is some intention to it. In a way, it's a new kind of funny for us - just throw in a bunch of blockquotes that show how loony someone is without bothering to comment.  I'm a gonna go fix the rest of the blockies now, if I were you I'd feel free to edit it any way you want.  01:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, wtf is up with my "p" and "/p" tags...?
 * I C&P'd this as the basis for editing it into an article, getting my sources all together. So thanks for knocking it into some sort of shape. I agree with Human that the quotes themselves stand on their own as some sort of indictment, although I had intended to do a referenced snark piece. 05:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20020805184913/www.quantum-life.com/ability.htm/ is borken... 18:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Still borken. Someone who cares please fix before I eviscerate? I've spent 20 minutes trying to get old versions of that site and am nowhere near finding what we "quote".  And why are we bothering to quote a defunct website anyway?  03:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (One year later) It loks like the last "/" in that link was the problem. Anyway I uploaded a screencap. The reason for quoting a defunct site is that it contains information about the subject and probably written by him which shows how he regards himself. I must follow up this stuff a bit more. (Helpers always wanted.) BTW this is all apparently true and not parody. 12:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Shit
This article is. It consists of three tl;dr quotes by other people after an intro paragraph that I think is being sarcastic most of the time but is pretty unfunny all of the time. Who's up for a rewrite? ThunderkatzHo! 19:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Rather than unilaterally deleting you might decide to chip in as it is linked to by other articles. 06:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Reversion
(Not sure of the etiquette for this kind of thing, apologies if I screw it up, this discussion is meant to happen elsewhere, etc.) Hey, could you please let me know what your reason for reverting my recent edits was? Too many edits without talking it out first, or what? Thanks. Esoteric24 (talk) 06:43, 31 July 2019 (UTC)