XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: le@top.put.com   
      
   In rec.arts.books.tolkien Michael F. Stemper  wrote:   
   > On 07/02/2022 12.31, Julian Bradfield wrote:   
   >> On 2022-02-07, Paul S Person  wrote:   
   >>> That is all very well but, as Louis Epstein points out in his reply,   
   >>> both the book and the film are public works, and comparing two public   
   >>> works which millions of people have experienced is not a form of   
   >>> crackpottery.   
   >>   
   >> But it is the word of a random on the internet, which can only be   
   >> checked by re-doing the research oneself.   
   >> Rightly or wrongly, Wikipedia thinks that material published by real   
   >> publishers is more likely to be accurate than randoms on the net.   
   >>   
   >>> Not to mention the possibility that such comparisons have been   
   >>> published. Or that anyone who has experienced both can point them out.   
   >>   
   >> If they have been published, there's a source.   
   >   
   > One of the regulars on rec.arts.sf.written corrected his date of birth   
   > in the wikipedia article about him. The correction was rejected because   
   > it was original research. Completely within the policy of "cited information   
   > only".   
   >   
   > So rejecting information about LotR because it has no citation is hardly   
   > "Tolkien Censorship". What it is is consistent with their published policies.   
      
   Which policies constitute indefensible censorship   
   best described as such.   
      
   -=-=-   
   The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,   
   at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)