Talk:Steven Emerson/Archive 2

message: Is there any evidence other than Emerson's claim that this "serious death threat" actually occurred?  If not, it has to be presented as a claim and not as a fact. --Zero 01:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Zero, it is presented as a claim: "Emerson says he has been the target of a serious death threat." SlimVirgin (talk) 01:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes, you are right, sorry about the false alarm.  I must have been looking at an older version.  Something odd is going on with the database; twice recently I editted an article and it showed up as changed but then the following day all trace of the change (incl. the article history and my contribs list) had vanished.  --Zero 04:45, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Death threat?

message: Balancing act, your additions to the intro are highly POV. He's controversial in your opinion, but not in others, and we can't accuse him, even by attributing it, of loose journalistic standards in the intro. SlimVirgin (talk) 07:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Slim, I agree with you about those additions, but the alternative is not so great either.  The intro has to at least say that he is a controversial figure as indeed that is one of the most notable things about him.  It also should not state as a fact that he is an expert on anything as that is a matter of widely-disputed opinion.  --Zero 08:30, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I see him very differently though. He may have become controversial since he started his work on Islamism, but he wasn't controversial before that, at least not that I'm aware of, and was a very notable journalist then, as he is now. Also, I don't think anyone who knows his work would dispute that he is, as the intro says, "one of the world's leading authorities on Islamist financial networks and operational structures." We do say he's controversial, without using the word, when we say he's regarded as an Islamophobe, and it's also implied by the information about the death threat. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are admitting that he became controversial since he started his work on terrorism and Islamism (which is what he is now known for), then that's it, he's controversial. Saying someone is controversial is not POV; it's simply an objective assessment of how that person is perceived by the public. Furthermore, there are PLENTY of people that dispute Emerson's claim to being an 'expert' of any kind, and the fact that he stuck his foot in his mouth on Oklahoma City, TWA 800, and Pakistan's nukes shows that their views are not altogether unreasonable. It's best to say that his supporters regard him as an expert, because I know that Muslims and many left-leaning people do not. I do not consider the addition of Emerson's statements on Oklahoma City and TWA 800 to be POV; you mention that he is "best" known for having predicted a major terrorist attack and warning Congress of the threat posed by OBL before September 11, but to others he is known for his gaffes on Oklahoma City and TWA 800 and other wild accusations he has made. Mentioning the former and not the latter is, in my opinion, POV. -BalancingAct 18:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't "admit" that he's controversial; as I said above, I see him very differently. Also, his expertise has to be judged by other experts. Can you produce a source who is an expert on Islamist financial networks who has cast doubt on the quality of Emerson's work? There are plenty who support it. He's best known by his peers for his warnings regarding 9/11 i.e. by other experts, Congress etc. I don't even know what his TWA 800 gaffe was, despite you saying he's best known for it. What other "wild accusations" has he made? SlimVirgin (talk) 23:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: CAIR is a Islamic advocacy group located on Capitol Hill.  It is not a "radical Islamic group" as stated in this article.  I doubt the US gov't would allow a radical Islamic group to have their headquarters two blocks from the Capitol.  I am changing the description to advocacy group.  If someone disagrees with me, please say so. Fkh82 20:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Fkh, it's a quote. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: CAIR

message: To the anon, the issue you keep trying to insert was discussed in court and the agent testified that he had never said that. Because it is defamatory, if you add it again, the article will be protected against your edits, or you may be reported and blocked. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: BLP

message: CltFn, when you add material to articles, would you please read them first? The Investigative Project material you added, and the award, was already in that section. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CltFn