Talk:Federation of Straight Chiropractors and Organizations: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>D. Matt Innis (→not being facetious: clarify maybe) |
imported>Hayford Peirce (→not being facetious: an interesting point -- go to Forum) |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:I don't think we need to differentiate straight from gay, but in this case could differentiate early about straight vs mixer, which should still satisfy that curiosity. 00:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC) | :I don't think we need to differentiate straight from gay, but in this case could differentiate early about straight vs mixer, which should still satisfy that curiosity. 00:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
::That's fine, I guess, for CZ. If this article were in WP, there would be 10,000 screams of outrage. Maybe, a couple of years from now, when there are many more visitors and/or authors, we should make it even clearer. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 01:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::Or just get it approved and then not have to worry about it :-) [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 02:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::That raises an interesting point, see a new Forum discussion that I will start right now. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 21:02, 7 February 2009
not being facetious
Don't you think that fairly near the top of the article you ought to have a little something about the "straight" vs. "gay" usage of the word now? I had to read *deep* into the article before I was certain of the intent.... Hayford Peirce 18:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think we need to differentiate straight from gay, but in this case could differentiate early about straight vs mixer, which should still satisfy that curiosity. 00:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- That's fine, I guess, for CZ. If this article were in WP, there would be 10,000 screams of outrage. Maybe, a couple of years from now, when there are many more visitors and/or authors, we should make it even clearer. Hayford Peirce 01:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Or just get it approved and then not have to worry about it :-) D. Matt Innis 02:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- That raises an interesting point, see a new Forum discussion that I will start right now. Hayford Peirce 03:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Categories:
- Article with Definition
- Health Sciences Category Check
- Developing Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Health Sciences Developing Articles
- Health Sciences Nonstub Articles
- Health Sciences Internal Articles
- Health Sciences Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Complementary and alternative medicine tag