User talk:JamesKosub

Spurlock
Please explain your edits in the talk page so the entire Wikipedia group can come to a concensus on how to deal with this. Your editing of critical views borders on a POV issue and should be addressed with everyone as a whole. Please take a minute? --Badlydrawnjeff 15:13, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

---

Done. And as I stated before: the critical views are not gone, nor are they diminished in any way. Rather, they have simply been edited for clarity and to eliminate redundant material. I did the same thing on an entry for the rapper, 50 Cent, and the world did not end. Repetitive phrasing, duplicated information and other items cry out for editing.

As for "Spurlock Watch," the site is nothing but a wingnut hatchet job on Spurlock. The author decries Spurlock's poor use of documentation, and yet makes undocumented claims, himself. I'm all for critical discussion, but in order for such discussion to be valid, it has to be grounded in some kind of rules-set fair to both sides. The author of "Spurlock Watch" is apparently only interested in doing a smear, and that's unacceptable. -- James

So people just doing smear jobs being featured on Wikipedia offends you? Cool, then we can go ahead and delete all entries relating to Morgan Spurlock! -68.0.124.45 01:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)