No edit summary |
→Arbitration enforcement: does not subst well |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
The article in reference is clearly written from a pro-vaccine point of view. |
The article in reference is clearly written from a pro-vaccine point of view. |
||
[[User:Conzar|Conzar]] ([[User talk:Conzar#top|talk]]) 22:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC) |
[[User:Conzar|Conzar]] ([[User talk:Conzar#top|talk]]) 22:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC) |
||
== Arbitration enforcement == |
|||
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&direction=next&oldid=712978331 Arbitration enforcement request] re Vaxxed. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 07:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:58, 1 April 2016
About Me
I have a masters and a bachelors in computer engineering. I have been trained to critically think and analysis information.
March 2016
You are the one writing an article that is not from a neutral point of view. The article is clearly 1 sided and pro-vax. Its funny that you post this information about neutral point of view editing as you are the one denying information from the film makers side. Conzar (talk) 19:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Here is something Guy needs to read and comprehend: "Editors, while naturally having their own points of view, should strive in good faith to provide complete information, and not to promote one particular point of view over another"
The article in reference is clearly written from a pro-vaccine point of view. Conzar (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement
Arbitration enforcement request re Vaxxed. Guy (Help!) 07:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)