QUOTE(Wikicrusher2 @ Mon 26th October 2009, 1:15am)
I just read that material you linked to, Somey. Obviously I was correct in my presumptions.
Shankbone wouldn't be "indifferent" on any matter that related to stroking his own ego. When he claims that he is "indifferent", it evokes the mental vision of someone who wants to disguise the fact that they really are egotistical, just that they didn't want to seem even more so than people are aware of.
If he said he favored inclusion of the article, it would only have fueled the arguments for deletion due to reasons of self-promotion. Vain, narcisistic, paranoid, all these things he is, but no one's ever said he was stupid.
Frankly, I'm surprised this hasn't been re-opened at DRV yet.
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 25th October 2009, 11:40pm)
QUOTE
The 2009 trip was all photography in the [[Negev desert]] and of people like [[David Faiman]]. What bias is there in that?
RiskerÂ
(T-C-L-K-R-D)
never suggested that there was "bias" in these photographs, or even in the trip itself. She was merely pointing out that in the absence of critical sources, an unbiased WP article on Mr. Shankers cannot be written. An article based entirely on an interview with Mr. Shankers cannot be considered "unbiased," even if the publication it appears in is considered "reliable." (At least in the real world.)
What really got his panties in a twist is that an editor with the stature of a 'crat came out in favor of deletion. Shankers is showing his true colors here with how he really feels about inclusion of his
autobiography.
This post has been edited by grievous: