Talk:Blackwater (company): Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 919:

:::::You missed my point. This article is a story. An article 12 months ago about a logo change would have been a non-story. The NYT melded one uninteresting fact about a logo change with the recent incident, and boom, we have a new story, a plot. It's a total fabrication by definition. --[[User:Haizum|<b>Haizum</b>]] <b> μολὼν λαβέ</b> 15:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

::::::Perhaps you've missed the point I've made multiples times. [[WP:Original resarch]] applies to us. It does not apply to the [[New York Times]] or other external, acceptable sources. They can do what you describe--that ''is'' what journalism is at times (please don't debate on this--it is what it is, and it's beyond the scope of our role as editors to debate that, nor will it help this article). Therefore, outside news sources are perfectly fine to do this. And, in turn, for us to report what they find or report. • <span style="font-variant:small-caps"><font color="#800080">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|Lawrence Cohen]]</font></span> 15:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

:::::::Well, that system is inherently flawed. Not imperfect, but flawed. Moving on, please address my specific complaints with regard to reference [29] as opposed to a debate surrounding the conduct of the NYT as a whole. --[[User:Haizum|<b>Haizum</b>]] <b> μολὼν λαβέ</b> 15:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, the article is now marginally acceptable to me. --[[User:Haizum|<b>Haizum</b>]] <b> μολὼν λαβέ</b> 07:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

:Why only marginal? What else don't you like? • <span style="font-variant:small-caps"><font color="#800080">[[User:Lawrence Cohen|Lawrence Cohen]]</font></span> 07:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)