Talk:The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition

Inappropriate Tone Tag
I tagged this article because it seemed like something in the tone is "off". I'm trying to better describe what it is that seems off, but if others disagree, please remove the tag. The middle part of the article almost seems like it needs to be split into a second article about industry front groups. Justin 18:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It has the tone of an opinion essay, and more to the point, the MIDDLE of an opinion essay, since there's no intro worth speaking of. No "this is what this is" followed by "this is what it's known for and why it's worth an article": you know, standard encyclopedia style. If I have time, I'll take a stab at it today, but don't let me stop anyone else from taking a crack at it.

Note that this is now linked to Brad Delong's blog, so expect some traffic. --Calton | Talk 05:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh good grief, Sourcewatch, an advocacy wiki, does a far better job in their entry than NPOV Wikipedia: --Calton | Talk 05:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Never mind: it turns out that a much better existing article (Advancement of Sound Science Center) is just in the wrong place. --Calton | Talk 06:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think the merge is a good idea and probably overdue. Unfortunately, there's just not that much interest in these two pages - they've been tagged for awhile. MastCell 16:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Early Junk Science ... TASSC
A good friend of mine compiled this information before it went missing from the internet several years ago. It discusses the early members of TASSC when Milloy was acting more as a press agent. I also wanted to add that the silicone and cell phone industry have also anted into the "junk science" public relations funding pool long ago. [http ://www.HumanticsFoundation.com/tassc.htm JUNK SCIENCE and TASSC].Junk, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Shalom. Ilena 18:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)