On May 23, 2011, at 7:58 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
--- On Mon, 23/5/11, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
From: Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com
On 23 May 2011 02:24, Brian J Mingusbrian.min...@colorado.edu
wrote:
When you Google for Santorum's last
--- On Tue, 24/5/11, GmbH gmbh0...@gmail.com wrote:
From: GmbH gmbh0...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia article on [[Santorum (neologism)]]
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Tuesday, 24 May, 2011, 1:11
On May 23, 2011, at 7:58 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
Yes, let's replace our elite judgment for that of everyone else.
You've got one word right, our. You are responsible for this.
No, he (and we) are not. Dan Savage is responsible for this.
--
-george william herbert
Huh?
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.netwrote:
Yes, let's replace our elite judgment for that of everyone else.
You've got one word right, our. You are responsible for this.
Fred
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
--- On Tue, 24/5/11, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know that it's been reviewed in analytical terms at
that
level. It's so offensive on one level that academics
and political
commentators seem to just shy away from it rather than
addressing the
rather deep Hey,
There's also this:
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/5/9/4/9/p259493_index.html
*Natality in the Private, Public, and Political Spheres: When Santorum
Becomes
--- On Tue, 24/5/11, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
I've no idea how the Wikipedia article manages to get
itself represented
twice, with two different titles (one of which
redirects to the other).
Personally, I think redirecting the
