Talk:Karen Kwiatkowski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] WTF, Rogerman?

Do you have reason to doubt she has an MA? Putting in stuff like "A website lists her as having an MA" appears to be very POV in terms of casting doubt on a claim that is easily checked. Why erase what appears to be well-known information about her background? Shall we go to the George W Bush page and insert that he only "claims" to have gone to Yale? If you want to research the info and either find sources to support it or show that it is invalid, please do so, but why are you taking it off the page without any reason to doubt it?--csloat 20:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 911 ct template

The template doesn't belong here. It may be applicable elsewhere, but nowhere on this page is it claimed that 911 was a conspiracy. Not everyone who is critical of the Bush Administration believes there was no plane at the pentagon or whatever. Please do not restore the template. Thanks. csloat 01:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

What are you saying? This article doesn’t mention Karen's thoughts regarding 9/11? That needs to be fixed. Here's a quote:

"It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics.";

she said so in this book; here is the summary, just scroll down to see it… anyway, if you are active on this article feel free (be kind;) and use this references to add relevant data. Regards. Lovelight 01:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

She's criticizing a government conspiracy theory there, not embracing her own. The template is iffy here at best, and it really doesn't belong. csloat 01:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

of course she's not, I'm aware of her work, admire her strength, as well as her honesty, that's why I'm pushing this, because enough is enough… decent people who are asking serious questions are not conspiracy theorists. The growth of the template will show this, in time; properly renamed it will serve a good purpose, that’s all. Please, don’t take this personally; we are striving to make things better here. Right? Lovelight 01:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not taking it personally, but it appears that you are engaged in WP:POINT. csloat 01:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)