| There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2019. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with |
User talk:101.190.9.79
Telling us to go read the talk page is less than welcome when there's nothing there except a whining BoN and polite rebuttals to said BoN's deletions/objections. If you keep tossing that section, you'll wind up blocked eventually. PacWalker 10:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
In case you misread the Jarah White fossil record[edit]
I'm not the one arguing for your "take a big axe to the article"-approach - quite the opposite, in fact. It was Weaseloid who raised concerns about possible libel, but no case has so far been brought that indicates any libellous material. The pro-Jarah BoN who tried to use the vague libel allegations to whitewash the article in February and March has not managed to convince anyone that this is the way to go. If you think the article can be improved by a rewrite - feel free. But please quit this blanket deletion edit war as it is essentially a rerun of the last BoN whitewash (whether deliberate or unintentional on your part). ScepticWombat (talk) 13:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)