| Revision as of 03:50, 16 November 2003 editHarris7 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,607 edits suppressed?← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:45, 21 December 2003 edit undoGbog (talk | contribs)958 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| :How can it be called "suppressed", when, according to the edit history, the text in question was added then later deleted (presumably because it is currently back in the ] article) by the ''same'' person (Alexandros, aka Aplank)? ] 03:50, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC) | :How can it be called "suppressed", when, according to the edit history, the text in question was added then later deleted (presumably because it is currently back in the ] article) by the ''same'' person (Alexandros, aka Aplank)? ] 03:50, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC) | ||
| Nearly only negatives claims in this article. Should be titled "Criticism against blabla". But has a pure criticist article a place in Misplaced Pages? ] 14:45, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:45, 21 December 2003
The following has been added: Note: Former sections headed Criticism and Misuse of funds have been suppressed. Is there any doubt as to the accuracy of this prefatory note? Any complaint about the accuracy of 'suppressed' in this instance? Wetman 00:06, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- How can it be called "suppressed", when, according to the edit history, the text in question was added then later deleted (presumably because it is currently back in the Mother Teresa article) by the same person (Alexandros, aka Aplank)? Harris7 03:50, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Nearly only negatives claims in this article. Should be titled "Criticism against blabla". But has a pure criticist article a place in Misplaced Pages? gbog 14:45, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)