Talk:Satanic ritual abuse: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
(→‎"Some observers": new section)
imported>Neil Brick
Line 6: Line 6:


At the very least, explain who these people may be, and why they are qualified as independent supporters of the online press release, accusing Wikipedia of pedophilia. I had not explicitly said the press release was from Neil Brick's organization, to avoid the appearance of "persecution". Nevertheless, is there now  a conflict of interest/Topic Informant situation here when the author of a press release, without adding his connection, starts adding sources, not easily verifiable, to support his position? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 19:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
At the very least, explain who these people may be, and why they are qualified as independent supporters of the online press release, accusing Wikipedia of pedophilia. I had not explicitly said the press release was from Neil Brick's organization, to avoid the appearance of "persecution". Nevertheless, is there now  a conflict of interest/Topic Informant situation here when the author of a press release, without adding his connection, starts adding sources, not easily verifiable, to support his position? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 19:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
:The press release was not added by me. I have no problem if it is deleted. [[User:Neil Brick|Neil Brick]] 19:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:22, 21 March 2009

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  The infliction of nonconsensual rituals, based on Satanic symbols or belief [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories:  Religion, Law and Psychology [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive:  1, 2  English language variant:  American English

"Some observers"

It really isn't very helpful to add two consecutive footnotes to "some observers", with only references to apparently hard-copy books from non-academic sources, to a verifiable online press release. The additional citations, with no description of the authors or their credentials, does not add information or substantiation to the press release.

At the very least, explain who these people may be, and why they are qualified as independent supporters of the online press release, accusing Wikipedia of pedophilia. I had not explicitly said the press release was from Neil Brick's organization, to avoid the appearance of "persecution". Nevertheless, is there now a conflict of interest/Topic Informant situation here when the author of a press release, without adding his connection, starts adding sources, not easily verifiable, to support his position? Howard C. Berkowitz 19:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The press release was not added by me. I have no problem if it is deleted. Neil Brick 19:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Satanic_ritual_abuse&oldid=599918"