Difference between revisions of "Talk:New Order"
Kadin Arbosa (talk | contribs) |
Kadin Arbosa (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | 2014-10-06: | + | 2014-10-06 Kadin Arbosa: |
The New Order have been claiming that E-Uni "vouches" for them, pointing to the section that says: | The New Order have been claiming that E-Uni "vouches" for them, pointing to the section that says: | ||
there is some evidence that the New Order honors these "indulgences." | there is some evidence that the New Order honors these "indulgences." | ||
I have changed the language used to hopefully make it clearer that E-Uni is not actually vouching for the New Order, and simply reporting that there is '''''some''''' evidence for their indulgences being honored. Perhaps a simple "E-Uni does not vouch or in any way endorse the New Order" declaration would be better. | I have changed the language used to hopefully make it clearer that E-Uni is not actually vouching for the New Order, and simply reporting that there is '''''some''''' evidence for their indulgences being honored. Perhaps a simple "E-Uni does not vouch or in any way endorse the New Order" declaration would be better. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | 2014-10-07 Kadin Arbosa: | ||
| + | I believe that the "not written from a neutral point of view" tag is not warranted. | ||
| + | I am simply stating the facts. Unless E-Uni IS going to vouch for CODE, then the facts are: | ||
| + | 1) we have had reports that CODE have honored their indulgences. | ||
| + | 2) we have no evidence that it is universally honored. | ||
| + | Given that my changes have been labeled as non-neutral, I will revert the changes I made, so as not to cause any issues. | ||
Revision as of 19:19, 7 October 2014
2014-10-06 Kadin Arbosa: The New Order have been claiming that E-Uni "vouches" for them, pointing to the section that says:
there is some evidence that the New Order honors these "indulgences."
I have changed the language used to hopefully make it clearer that E-Uni is not actually vouching for the New Order, and simply reporting that there is some evidence for their indulgences being honored. Perhaps a simple "E-Uni does not vouch or in any way endorse the New Order" declaration would be better.
2014-10-07 Kadin Arbosa:
I believe that the "not written from a neutral point of view" tag is not warranted.
I am simply stating the facts. Unless E-Uni IS going to vouch for CODE, then the facts are:
1) we have had reports that CODE have honored their indulgences.
2) we have no evidence that it is universally honored.
Given that my changes have been labeled as non-neutral, I will revert the changes I made, so as not to cause any issues.
