Difference between revisions of "Talk:CUSJ-Jester Feud"
(New page: It probably doesn't need to be said, but should there be any information here regarding whether or not there ACTUALLY is a feud? ~~~~) |
Nonsensical (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
It probably doesn't need to be said, but should there be any information here regarding whether or not there ACTUALLY is a feud? [[User:WhatYouKnowAboutThat|WhatYouKnowAboutThat]] 01:05, 30 April 2007 (EDT) | It probably doesn't need to be said, but should there be any information here regarding whether or not there ACTUALLY is a feud? [[User:WhatYouKnowAboutThat|WhatYouKnowAboutThat]] 01:05, 30 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Almost every verb in this article needs to be changed; it's clear that this is all being done by Jester, yet this article uses verbs indicating that CUSJ has actually admitted to everything. The statement of quite so many speculations as fact is rather glaring and, given that this whole topic seems to be one which has been promulgated almost solely by anonymous postings and wiki-vandalisms, i'd like to suggest it be edited to reflect that noone has admitted to anything, that the only declarative statments anyone can make is who has been accused of what by whom, and that the page be locked. [[User:Umlund|Umlund]] 07:54, 30 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Agreed. Only trouble is that I can't be bothered editing it - the feud really is ''that'' boring! {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 08:01, 30 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Re-edited it to try to be more neutral in accusations. [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 17:54, 30 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:54, 30 April 2007
It probably doesn't need to be said, but should there be any information here regarding whether or not there ACTUALLY is a feud? WhatYouKnowAboutThat 01:05, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
Almost every verb in this article needs to be changed; it's clear that this is all being done by Jester, yet this article uses verbs indicating that CUSJ has actually admitted to everything. The statement of quite so many speculations as fact is rather glaring and, given that this whole topic seems to be one which has been promulgated almost solely by anonymous postings and wiki-vandalisms, i'd like to suggest it be edited to reflect that noone has admitted to anything, that the only declarative statments anyone can make is who has been accused of what by whom, and that the page be locked. Umlund 07:54, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
- Agreed. Only trouble is that I can't be bothered editing it - the feud really is that boring! − Reaganaut 08:01, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
- Re-edited it to try to be more neutral in accusations. Nonsensical 17:54, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
