Talk:Charlton Heston/Archive 1

Untitled
Jeez, is this fair? Removing from article pending discussion here:
 * In 2002, he publicly announced that he has Alzheimer's disease. There are critics who have voiced suspicion that this was meant as a public relations move to head off accusations of bigotry on the release of the Michael Moore documentary, Bowling for Columbine, in which Heston blurted out in an interview his belief that American's "mixed ethncity" was the cause of America's alarming high death by firearm rate.


 * Yikes. I'll put that bit above as one of the most cynical things I've ever read.... Does the author doubt that Heston has Alzheimer's?  You must admit he seemed more than a little confused in the interview, and not in a sharp & perceptive way.  Addled, I mean.  KQ


 * Hcheney has repeatedly deleted edits made by other contributors. This editor repeatedly reverts to prose that contains multiple unsupported claims of fact.  This is in direct conflict with the guidance presented "Under Tips for Editing Wikipedia Articles" which states: "Please use a neutral point of view, and please cite your sources so others can check and extend your work."

Hcheney's favored passage appears designed to offer explanations for Mr. Heston's statements and actions and to condemn Mr. Moore.

The paragraph (reproduced in full below) is biased. At a minimum the bias should be disclosed.

"In 2002 Michael Moore asked to do an interview with Heston for the movie Bowling for Columbine. Moore spoke through an intercom at Heston's gate and identified himself as a member of the NRA. When the interview started, Moore began bringing up controversial issues such as Heston's appearance at an NRA rally soon after the Columbine shootings. After explaining he was merely "defending the second amendment" and fielding similar questions from Moore, Heston excused himself from the interview. The movie also contains falsehoods about 2 NRA rallies Heston held where Moore withholds information and edits video first after Columbine (http://bowlingfortruth.com/bowlingforcolumbine/scenes/hestonrally1.htm) and later after another school shooting (http://bowlingfortruth.com/bowlingforcolumbine/scenes/hestonrally2.htm) (the first was an annual meeting Heston was required by law to hold and was preplanned to be held in Denver, Colorado and the second was actually a 'Get out to Vote' rally that Moore himself attended in support for Ralph Nader.)"

A cursory review reveals obvious examples of bias, for example:

1)Why would the writer use the phrase "began bringing up" in the passage below instead of a simple phrases such as "referred to" or "asked about"?

"In 2002 Michael Moore asked to do an interview with Heston for the movie Bowling for Columbine. Moore spoke through an intercom at Heston's gate and identified himself as a member of the NRA. When the interview started, Moore began bringing up controversial issues such as Heston's appearance at an NRA rally soon after the Columbine shootings. "

2) Assuming for arguments sake that the writer’s assertions are accurate, what would motivate the choice of the word "falsehoods" as opposed to the word "inaccuracies" in the passage below?

"After explaining he was merely "defending the second amendment" and fielding similar questions from Moore, Heston excused himself from the interview. The movie also contains falsehoods about 2 NRA rallies Heston held where Moore withholds information and edits video first after Columbine"

3) The word "merely" outside the quote marks in the sentence below does not convey additional information but it does convey the writers opinion.

"After explaining he was merely "defending the second amendment" and fielding similar questions from Moore, Heston excused himself from the interview."

On June 28, 2004, Hcheney deleted the following independently verifiable quote of Mr. Heston:

"In an interview with Michael Moore when asked what he thought was the reason for the high rate of gun crimes in the United States versus other developed countries, Mr. Heston said that the reason was that “we have a more mixed ethnicity.”"

Mr. Heston is the subject of both sentences in the paragraph, yet Hcheney described his deletion of the paragraph as "removed paragraph on Michael Moore".

The quote is easily confirmed by viewing the publicly available video "Bowling for Columbine".

I added this paragraph after independently confirming a statement contributed by 24.150.24.106.

The statement by 24.150.24.106 was also deleted by Hcheney.


 * Anonymous users and Michael Moore are not appropriate primary sources for Wikipedia articles. Please stop adding dubious material to this article. --"D ICK " C HENEY 00:34,29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Neither Michael Moore nor Anonymous are my primary sources. My primary source is a publicly available on camera interview of Charlton Heston that appears on the video "Bowling for Columbine".  This fact is verifiable by anyone who cares to do so.

I object to your attempts discredit me by referring to my 2 sentence, verifiable addition as "dubious material". I am disappointed in your persistent violation of Wikipedia guidelines by attempting to suppress verifiable, factual information.

Please see "Tips for Editing Wikipedia Articles" which states: "Please use a neutral point of view, and please cite your sources so others can check and extend your work." FactsOnly 02:45, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Any film that is a creation of Michael Moore is completely void of factual or academic content, and as such, is not an appropriate primary source for a Wikipedia article. --"D ICK " C HENEY 02:53, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * That may be YOUR POV, but I defy you to try using it as justification for editing articles. Rick'''K 05:52, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * If he's on film saying this then it is valid - regardless of Moore's motives. The footage is verifiable. 02:56, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Footage can easily omit an expansion and explanation. Moore has been known to take footage out of context. --"D ICK " C HENEY 02:59, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Not to mention being an answer to a completely different question. Architeuthis 03:03, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * In reponse to the following message sent to me by Hcheney:

"Michael Moore, being an entertainer akin to Ann Coulter, is not a reliable primary source. Your additions to Charlton Heston are inappropriate. --"DICK" CHENEY 02:57, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)"

My response is as follows.

The attempt to discredit my efforts by linking them to Michael Moore and Ann Coulter and their credibility is transparent. Therefore I will ignore attempts to divert the issue under consideration into a discussion of Michael Moore. Michael Moore criticisms should probably be on the Michael Moore page.

Michael Moore is not my primary source. My primary source is a recorded interview. Since this is the second time you have accused me of using Michael Moore as a primary source it appears that we have different definitions of "primary" source. Mine is correct. I believe the difference between the two sources is clear.

The single factual sentence that has been repeatedly deleted is not about Mr. Moore it is a documented quote of Mr Heston.

The issue at hand is simple and clear - Mr. Heston made a statement recorded on camera. Individuals have repeatedly prevented an effort to accurately record the statement by deleting references to the statement.

Mr. Heston should be credited with the statement that he made. Denying, deleting or explaining his statement will not make it go away - he said it. If there is evidence that Mr. Heston was tricked into making the statement then the appropriate response would be to say so in the article and to present the evidence.

Interestingly, the article that has been repeatedly reposted by Hcheney contains assertions based on less evidence than Mr. Heston's on-camera interview.

Contributing to Wikipedia does not mean censoring matters of fact that do not fit your agenda and deleting them as quickly as they appear.

Mr. Heston's statement is verifiable fact. Bullying will not change this.

"In an interview with Michael Moore when asked what he thought was the reason for the high rate of gun crimes in the United States versus other developed countries, Mr. Heston said that the reason was that “we have a more mixed ethnicity.”"

Once again... "Tips for Editing Wikipedia Articles" which states: "Please use a neutral point of view, and please cite your sources so others can check and extend your work." FactsOnly 05:31, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I would agree to using the full, un-edited interview as a primary source. However, since it is not possible to obtain the full, un-edited interview, we would be forced to trust Michael Moore if we were to use the summary video as a primary source. Since Michael Moore is an entertainer with a strong agenda, we cannot in good judgement trust his summary of the interview because that would incorporate his agenda and POV into this article. How do we know what else Charlton Heston said to put this quote into context?


 * This article needs work, I agree. However, I do not think adding dubious material will help this article evolve into a neutral, factual, balanced masterpiece. --"D ICK " C HENEY 13:15, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I must respectfully disagree.

Your argument implies that a person with the requisite power could delete reference to any audio, video or transcribed record at odds with his or her agenda under a justifying claim of incompleteness.

I believe that it is undesirable to allow anyone (this applies to me) to prevent others from seeing information related to an event based on possible incompleteness of the record or based on bias of the recorder. Evidence impeaching the accuracy of the record should be presented along with the record.

I sought out and viewed the recording, and while your distrust of Moore, entertainers and people with strong agendas is duly noted, I found no support for your veiled accusations against Moore as regards this specific sequence of video. Repeated use of the phrase "dubious material" does not change this. I mention in passing that Mr. Heston himself is an entertainer with a strong agenda.

I am comfortable with my defense of unbiased recording of fact; it is an approach that I apply consistently. I presume your approach to this article is consistent with your approach to editing other articles. Bias, credibility and the honesty of the Wikipedia process are touchstone issues here.

Under "Tips for Editing Wikipedia Articles": "Please use a neutral point of view, and please cite your sources so others can check and extend your work." FactsOnly 14:45, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Speech made by Mr. Heston to Harvard on the basis of POV has been deleted. POV refers to "point of view" of the editor of the document.  Mr. Heston's speech was widely recorded, widely distibuted and Mr. Heston was proud of his speech.  I believe transcripts of the speech are available from his office.  I must strongly object once again to this censorship of Mr. Heston.FactsOnly 15:02, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I would question the relevance of one interview, given late in life. I would also question the editorializing as to the validity of Michael Moore.  Therefore, I thought it best to remove the section entirely.  The information belongs in Bowling for Columbine, not here. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:09, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Actually, check the history--I never removed the Harvard law speech (nor do I plan to). [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:11, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

My apologies to Meelar for mistakenly accusing him of censorship. FactsOnly 15:13, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I don't see that this information is irrelevant. It gives insight into Mr Heston's viewpoint. If he had given the interview to the New York Times would you have suggested we move the information to that article? Howver you are right that it is only one interview - maybe we can find more examples. DJ Clayworth 15:18, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * It simply seemed to me that presenting that one interview--and no other quotes, save for one short sentence--seemed POV. I agree, more and better examples would be the best thing. For example, the Harvard Law speech. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:20, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

My apologies to Meelar for mistakenly accusing him of censorship. FactsOnly 15:13, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * The arguments here do not stand up to scrutiny.

You are within your rights to question the relevance of one interview given late in life. In that case your reservations should be noted. The fact that the inerview took place should not be concealed.

A review of the record will show that I have said repeatedly that this is not Mr. Moore's page, and I have offered no opinion of Mr Moore. The use of the term "editorializing" does not change this.

If Mr. Heston's quote belongs under "Bowling for Columbine. Does that mean that reference to the "cold dead hands" statement belongs only under the NRA?  Does that also mean that Mr.  Heston's  satement about alzheimers should only be on a medical page?  Does that mean that references to his movies should only be on entertainement pages? I disagree with this position. FactsOnly 15:31, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Actually, the editorializing I was referring to was done by User:Hcheney. Also, read Viajero's suggestion; he speaks sensibly. Alliteratively, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:54, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * FactsOnly, I think part of the problem is a stylistic one. One simply doesn't insert a quote or two in the middle of an article without any kind of editorial framework. Quotes should be used to butress some some kind of argument, to represent a point of view that is under discussion. Inserting them in such a way as this is is simply making an implicit editorial judgment. Personally, I am not categorically opposed to the Harvard Law School quote, but as it currently stands it is not satisfactory; I think it needs to be introduced in some way. Please look at some of the other biographies we have here on controversial individuals for some ideas on how to handle such problems.  -- Viajero 15:34, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Viajero I understand your point about style. Here is some background.

Originally, I added a paragragh about Mr. Heston's ideas. The addition mentioned ideas Mr. Heston included in his speech at Harvard. The addition was deleted, and I recieved a message ordering me to cease vandalizing the page. I was surprised at this and wary that I was being set up.

In response I (1)registered a username (2)used as little as possible of my own words (3)relied primarily on Mr. Heston's own words.

I minimize my own stylistic contribution because my integrity has been challenged in order to justify deleting independently verifiable information that I contributed.FactsOnly 15:56, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Viajero, the issue here is quite simple despite efforts to make it complicated. Here it is.

Mr. Heston like most people is a complicated man. Some editors of this page wish to conceal some of his opinions by deleting Mr. Heston's own words.

One can dress this up and make it about indicting Michael Moore, about my own lack of style, about how late in life Mr Heston is, about how many interviews Mr. Heston did, about the injection of "point of view", or any other line of reasoning. The undeniable fact is that Mr. Heston has ideas and he has proudly expressed them - publicly.

To conceal these ideas does a disservice to Mr. Heston, to scholarship and to Wikipedia.FactsOnly 16:08, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Meelar and Viajero, I think you have done a good job of improving the article.FactsOnly 17:17, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Thank you! [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 17:21, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Spelling on Alzheimers?FactsOnly 17:29, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * The following sentence was changed to once again attribute Mr. Heston's statements to Michael Moore's film editing:

"Moore's interview, which was not completely shown in the movie, is considered controversial in its treatment of Heston, who by then was suffering from Alzheimer's."

The fact is that many interviews that appear in films are not aired in their entirety.


 * I have to agree on this point. -- Viajero 21:29, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Some Wikipedia editors are going to great lengths to distance Mr. Heston from his own words. This violation of objectivity is not egregious enough for me to embark on another "who can out-edit whom" competition, and the editorial bias against Mr. Moore is clear.

For myself, I am simply satisfied that (1) the facts are recorded despite the tortuous qualification that has been attached (2) the attempt to label me a vandalizing follower of Michael Moore (I am neither) has failed.FactsOnly 20:59, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I also recieved this message from Hcheney; I include it for anyone who may make the mistake of complaining about censorship after an unjustified deletion of a contribution. The message follows:

"Saying that other user's edits are "censorship" is a violation of the no personal attacks policy. Since you are a new user, I am going to assume good faith that you did not know about our policies. --"DICK" CHENEY 20:09, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)"

Thank you for your message Hcheney, and for upholding the policies of Wikipedia, I am quite willing to abide by this policy; my only request is that you point me to the location of the rule prohibiting the use of the word censored so I can confirm it for myself. Thank you in advance FactsOnly 20:59, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hcheney, if you don't believe the quote from the Moore documentary belongs in this article, ok, say so. But larding it with those kinds of qualifications isn't the best solution. -- Viajero 21:59, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * The latest edit regarding Mr. Heston's gun crime statement.

"This interview and Moore's other interviews in the documentary are considered controversial, even deceptive by critics. At the time of the interview Heston was suffering from Alzheimer's."

I find it biased; however, I shall refrain from editing.FactsOnly 22:21, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I don't believe the quote belongs in the article, but considering the fact I was accused of "censorship" and immediately reverted when I did remove the quote. In the interest of wiki-harmony, I don't have that big of a problem with the quote. However, I feel it is necessary to put the quote into context. As for my "biased" edit I think we can all agree that: My expansion merely reflects the reality of these 3 points. If you wish to question if these points are factual, fine. I feel my expansion puts the quote into a factual context. --"D ICK " C HENEY 22:34, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Michael Moore's interviews in Bowling for Columbine are controversial, as in they are subject to significant criticism.
 * 2) Michael Moore's critics find his interviews in the movie to be deceptive.
 * 3) Charlton Heston was suffering from Alzheimer's at the time of the interview.

Hcheney, the quote belongs in the article because it happened. The addition of the "interview was deceptive" comment is biased and should be removed.

Yes, some critics claim the interview was deceptive. In addition, some supporters argue that the interview was an accurate reflection of Mr. Heston's opinions.

You have chosen to ignore the opinions of supporters while highlighting opinions of the crtics.FactsOnly 22:54, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It does not, in any way, lay judgement on the interview. It does not state the "interview was deceptive". What the current revision does state is: "This interview . . . (is considered) deceptive by critics", which the critics certainly feel. If I was ignoring the "supporters", I would be outrightly opposed to including this quote, and not trying to work with you to improve this article. There is no need to say "Michael Moore's supporters think he is right correct." Moore's "supporters" are not challenging Heston's ability to conduct a fair interview, whereas Heston's "supporters" (among others) are challenging Moore's ability to conduct a fair interview. If there is anything beyond the obvious that was omitted about the opinions of Moore's "supporters" in so far as Charlton Heston goes, please add it to the article. --"D ICK " C HENEY 23:09, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hcheney, your addition is biased. Nothing you have said has changed that. Based on your comment anyone could add statements to this article as follows

"Critics say Heston promotes child gun deaths"

This is clearly an opinion held by many opposed to the NRA; however It is clear that adding a statement such as this one to this page would be biased.

I will not edit the page because I do not believe that you intend to permit an unbiased article to be created.FactsOnly 23:18, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I recieved this message from Hcheney. Does anyone know if I need to consult an attorney?

"I find the "censorship" remark and following statement at Talk:Charlton Heston to be libelous "I will not edit the page because I do not believe that you intend to permit an unbiased article to be created." In the interest of maintaining a friendly setting on Wikipedia, please refrain from making accusations and calling names. --"DICK" CHENEY 00:29, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)"

Hcheney, I have not called you any names. I have said that you censored me. You deleted factual additions that I made several times, and you sent me messages to stop vandalizing the page in an attempt to discourage me from editing the page. You therefore censored me. That is not calling you a name or making an accusation. It is a fact. Happily, the record of those envents is here for anyone to see. I am interested in only one thing -the creation of an unbiased article.

Mr. Heston can be quoted without conducting a review of Mr. Moore’s work. I reject the linkage of the two. Acknowledgement of controversy is appropriate. The selective reporting of criticisms is not appropriate.

I've changed my mind; I will edit the sentence if no one else does. I acknowledge that moving the document in this direction is not optimal, but it seems to be the only way to make any progress towards a neutral document. I will make the following edit.

"This interview and Moore's other interviews in the documentary are considered controversial, even deceptive by critics while others believe the interviews in the documentary are not deceptive. On August 9th, 2002, Mr. Heston announced that he was suffering from Alzheimer's disease."

(1) The fact is that Moore has supporters and detractors; since my sentence acknowledges both it is a more balanced comment than the current comment.

(2)The statement that Mr. Heston was suffering from Alzheimer’s at the time of the interview with more is a presumption. We do not have the date of Mr. Heston's interview with Mr. Moore nor did we have the date when Mr. Heston became ill. While he may have been ill at the time of the interview, we do not know this as fact. My statement includes an independently verifiable date.

If no one else decides to change it, I'll change it myself and we can play the "who-can-out edit-whom game again. I believe that edits that persist in attacking Mr. Moore on Mr. Heston's page in order to alienate Mr. Heston from his own comments are inappropriate.  I suggest attacks on Michael Moore be directed to the Michael Moore pageFactsOnly 01:34, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Columbine quote

 * In the documentary Bowling for Columbine (2002), Michael Moore asked Heston in an interview why he thought there was such a high rate of violent crime in the United States as compared to other developed countries. Heston said he believed it was because "we have a more mixed ethnicity." This interview and Moore's other interviews in the documentary are considered controversial, even deceptive by critics. At the time of the interview Heston was suffering from Alzheimer's.

FactsOnly and Hcheney: I have moved the controversial paragraph here. Let's discuss it further below rather than engage in a revert war.

IMO, either we accept the quote as legitimate and representative and present it as such, or we don't include it. I am not in favor of including it but wrapping it in all kinds of qualifiers with respect to Moore's filmmaking techniques or other factors, mitigating or otherwise. FactsOnly: simply because Heston once uttered these words does not imply that we are required to include them in an article on him. Encyclopedia writing is the art of synthesis and distillation. We are not here to either honor or vilify him, simply describe him in a couple of paragraphs. Therefore, please explain here why you think that this quote should be included, why it is relevant to our understanding of the man. Thank you. -- Viajero 11:42, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Viajero, I understand your effort to resolve this issue in a civil manner. At this point, the editor attempting to conceal the words spoken by Mr. Heston has been successfull in having the reference removed. As a result of this change, visitors to the page who do not know about the interview will not learn about it from Wikipedia. I do not believe that this is a desired state of affairs.My analysis follows:

Independently verifiable facts: (1)Mr. Heston was recorded in an on-camera interview (2)Mr. Heston attributed high levels of US gun crime to mixed ethnicity (3)Mr. Moore's interview is controversial (4)Some believe the interview was unfair and even deceptive (5)Some believe the interview was fair and accurate (6)On 8/9/2002, Mr. Heston announced that he was suffering from Alzheimers

Source of the contention: Certain editors of this page are determined to do one of the following (1) conceal the fact that the interview took place (2) conceal the fact that the words were spoken (3) negate Mr. Heston's claim on his own words

Editors have tried by negate Mr. Heston's claim on his own words by: (1) attempting to move the discussion into a dispute about Michael Moore. (2)highlighting charges of "deceptive interview" levelled by critics of Mr. Moore (2) refusing to record views disagreeing with the "deceptive interview claim" (3) Moving beyond Mr. Heston's August 9th 2002 announcement regardng Alzheimer's to state as fact that Mr. Heston was suffering from Alzheimer's at the time of the Moore interview (a better solution would be to state the possibility).

Potential solutions with which I have no problem: 1) Any statement which includes all the independently verifiable facts 2) Any unbiased statement - ex. If fact 4 is excluded, then fact 3 should be also

My own position: (1) The interview took place and should be recorded (2)The interview should be labelled as controversial, because it is controversial (3) Criticisms of Michael Moore should be on the Michael Moore page (4) Praise or support of Michael Moore should be on the Michael Moore page

My Point of View : (1)optimally an editor should not compromise the presentation of independently verifiable and relevant information. FactsOnly 13:00, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Viajero, I have just seen your request from me. Here is my response (1) Mr. Heston at the time of the statement was the prsesident of the NRA the largest gun lobby in the world (2) The statement was about gun crime (3) The statement was controversial (4) The persistent efforts attempts by some to dissacociate Mr. Heston from these words indicates how important the statement is (5) Mr. Heston has not disassociated himself from the statement (6) Many believe that the statement is reflective of Mr. Hestons views and is therefore relevant to understanding him (7) Removing it from the page conceals a controversial event from new readers who do not know about it. FactsOnly 13:10, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Viajero, I understand the issues involved in writing for an encyclopedia. However, when the head of the National Rifle Association makes a controversial statement about gun crime, the issue should not be finding a rationale for including the statement, the issue should be on finding a rationale for excluding the statement.

I accept that a statement may be excluded reasons including: 1)The statement does not add significant information about the person or his or her ideas 2)The statement is lengthy

In this case, the statement in question is brief; it conveys information about Mr. Heston's beliefs; the statement is controversial.

If I did research on Mr. Heston on Wikipedia without finding reference to this statement, and later found this statement from another source, I would wonder why it was not mentioned in Wikipedia.FactsOnly 13:26, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * First, what appears on other websites is of secondary importance. Second, it is clear that you regard this statement of his in the interview as being representative of his political beliefs. If this is true, than it should be possible for you to find other representative quotes which were not obtained in such a controversial fashion (such as the Harvard Law speech). I strongly urge you to pursue this possibility. Thanks. -- Viajero 13:56, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Viajero, I must disagree.

Regarding your statement "what appears on other websites is of secondary importance"

This may be true; however what appears in other sources (not restricted to websites) is one way to discover if a particular source is excluding relevant information or is reporting only selected information. I

Regarding your statement "it is clear that you regard this statement of his in the interview as being representative of his political beliefs. If this is true,..."

What I regard as true has no impact on the facts and is irrelevant.

Regarding your statement "than it should be possible for you to find other representative quotes which were not obtained in such a controversial fashion"

The conclusion does not follow from the premise. Whatever my opinion is it does not guarantee my ability to find other statements.

Regarding your strong urging to "find other representative quotes".

I was inclined to fight fairly for the inclusion of a matter of fact; however I am not inclined to put in the effort that you are suggesting.

I suspect that the Mr. Heston's controversial statement will not appear on Wikipedia. My own point of view is that this results in an incomplete picture of the man. This is unfortunate. I have been worn down and have no more energy for this.

Hcheney, I congratulate you on your efforts! FactsOnly 14:29, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Is there any way of confirming which year Heston was born in (1922, 1923 or 1924)?

Assessment comment
Substituted at 14:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC)