168:. This article is a puff piece for an unmitigated scoundrel widely regarded by those familiar with him, barring his small albeit influential circle of devotees, as one of the worst monsters in recent history. Inadequate attention is paid to his advocacy of world dictatorship through nuclear terrorism. Inadequate attention is paid to support of eugenics and against populations with darker skin-hues. I will not support until the said problems are corrected.
118:. This looks extensive, but it has several problems. In addition to mentioned above lack of references, the text needs careful going over ilinks - some terms are linked only in their second/third/etc. usage or not at all - examples (Principia Mathematica (which I linked now), World War One, Pacifism, 20th century). I am sure with a little editing work this can be a FA, but now it is still a work in progress needing some editing. --
81:. It needs to be made clearer what information comes from which documents: footnotes and separation of Bibliography (works by Russell) and References/Further reading (works about Russell used to fact-check/write the article. I don't really have a problem with the few one-line paragraphs SimonP mentions, but I agree tthe quotes belong in Wikiquote, unless they are used in the text to underline some aspect of Russell's persona.
337:
I think perhaps we need to break off the 'Further reading' into a seperate link as its making the article overly long and somewhat intimidating for some readers - partly why it failed as a candidate I assume - How do people feel? [I appreciate he is not known as a peer but I have added the style to
291:
You are replying to my argument by addressing the person presenting the argument rather than the argument itself, which is a logical fallacy. Further, you have no evidence that I am a follower of the LaRouche movement. While my user page expresses my admiration of Lyndon LaRouche, he is just one of
213:
OK.. so you're merely criticizing the article for omitting the vital information that BR is "an unmitigated scoundrel" (cliché alert) and a monster? I'd better re-read those FAC instructions. Seriously, to contribute to this process, please make only actionable objections.
58:, a good and comprehensive article but the formatting needs to be improved. There are too many one sentence paragraphs, and why is the succession box in the middle of the article? Personally I would also like to see the quotes section moved to Wikiquote. -
41:
How about references? If works were used from the bibliography to write the article, they need to be cited properly. And inline citation would be a real help as well for an article of this scope. --
299:
Your edits betray you. You are a follower of Lyndon LaRouche, and
Bertrand Russell was not evil. Those are both facts. This isn't the place to discuss it, however; please see your talk page.
194:
I am not attacking the editors. I am criticizing the article for omission of vital information, which, according to the instructions on FAC, is an essential part of this process.
258:, which teaches that Bertrand Russell is, literally, evil. Two arbitration committee cases have ruled that editors may not act in a way that appears to promote the views of
225:
No, for whitewashing his support for eugenics and support for an unprovoked nuclear attack on Russia in order to establish a one-world government.
149:
Image tag fixed. Deryckchan, maybe you are not interested to read this article. Russell did extensive work, to summ up is actually not possible. --
17:
230:
If one believes that this does not make him a monster, that is a commentary on his humanity, about which I have nothing more to add.
251:
179:
vote. Please use a civil tone and don't attack the editors who put up their baby articles here. And again, please note that
33:
Long, well-written and more important accurate article about one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century. --
69:
Right, I fixed the succession box. But in my opinion there should be a few quotes in the
Knowledge article. --
310:
Now you are arguing from authority, despite the fact that I am using NON-LAROUCHE sources. Go figure.
303:
266:
176:
46:
245:
219:
188:
255:
128:, the copyright on the images needs to be established and the article should have references--
105:
97:
27:
300:
263:
259:
143:
129:
86:
42:
226:
311:
293:
241:
231:
195:
180:
169:
109:
215:
184:
157:
150:
119:
70:
34:
59:
82:
101:
228:
338:
bring it into line with the majority of other peerage articles.
142:. Nobody will be interested to read an article of 7919 words.--
156:
I, for example, do like my articles long and comprehensive. --
96:. I recommend adding more info about Russell's support of
106:
http://www.spokesmanbooks.com/Bertrand_Russell/future.htm
175:Cognition, I repeat the protest i made at the
8:
183:are an especially bad idea. Best wishes,
166:Object in the strongest possible terms
158:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
120:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates
7:
102:http://www.vcn.bc.ca/wfcvb/whywf.htm
24:
1:
352:
146:2005-06-30 15:36:59 (UTC)
37:June 28, 2005 12:30 (UTC)
305:July 2, 2005 05:20 (UTC)
181:aggressive edit summaries
73:June 28, 2005 16:24 (UTC)
62:June 28, 2005 15:15 (UTC)
52:June 28, 2005 13:07 (UTC)
296:2 July 2005 04:55 (UTC)
268:July 2, 2005 04:36 (UTC)
234:2 July 2005 05:18 (UTC)
222:2 July 2005 05:12 (UTC)
191:2 July 2005 02:35 (UTC)
172:1 July 2005 23:19 (UTC)
153:July 1, 2005 05:00 (UTC)
132:30 June 2005 08:48 (UTC)
122:29 June 2005 19:04 (UTC)
112:29 June 2005 11:48 (UTC)
90:28 June 2005 19:34 (UTC)
314:2 July 2005 05:24 (UTC)
254:) is a follower of the
198:2 July 2005 02:38 (UTC)
160:1 July 2005 16:05 (UTC)
292:many people I admire.
177:Carl Friedrich Gauss
138:, yes, long, long,
256:LaRouche movement
51:
343:
98:world government
89:
49:
45:
28:Bertrand Russell
351:
350:
346:
345:
344:
342:
341:
340:
335:
260:Lyndon LaRouche
85:
47:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
349:
347:
334:
331:
330:
329:
328:
327:
326:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
319:
318:
317:
316:
315:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
273:
272:
271:
270:
269:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
199:
163:
162:
161:
154:
133:
123:
113:
91:
76:
75:
74:
64:
63:
53:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
348:
339:
332:
313:
309:
308:
307:
306:
304:
302:
298:
297:
295:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
281:
267:
265:
261:
257:
253:
250:
247:
243:
239:
236:
235:
233:
229:
227:
224:
223:
221:
217:
212:
211:
210:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
197:
193:
192:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
173:
171:
167:
164:
159:
155:
152:
148:
147:
145:
141:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
121:
117:
114:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
92:
88:
84:
80:
77:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
61:
57:
54:
50:
44:
40:
39:
38:
36:
29:
26:
19:
336:
248:
237:
165:
139:
135:
125:
116:Minor object
115:
93:
78:
55:
32:
301:SlimVirgin
264:SlimVirgin
43:Spangineer
312:Cognition
294:Cognition
242:Cognition
232:Cognition
196:Cognition
170:Cognition
144:Deryck C.
110:Nathan256
48:(háblame)
333:Writings
252:contribs
216:Bishonen
185:Bishonen
140:too long
238:Comment
151:ThomasK
94:Comment
71:ThomasK
35:ThomasK
136:Object
126:Object
100:. See
79:Object
60:SimonP
56:Object
130:nixie
16:<
246:talk
220:talk
189:talk
83:Phil
262:.
240:.
218:|
187:|
108:.
104:,
249:·
244:(
87:s
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.