Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Jason Sherman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 7 months ago by Geronimus Prime in topic Edit on 2025-09-15 04:23 contains slander
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jason Sherman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:00, 20 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Edit on 2025-09-15 04:23 contains slander

[edit]

It seems that the edit on 2025-09-15 04:23 by user 67.21.156.9 modified the text to suggest that the CBC Radio drama Afghanada - which aired from 2006 to 2011 - was « Israeli propaganda ». Whatever the intentions of the contributor, that is simply bollocks. (And not at all justified in the referenced article.)

I would gladly accept qualifying it as "Canadian military propaganda," since it focussed on the Canadian military intervention in Afghanistan following the September 2001 events. However, the usual tone of the CBC in these controversial matters is one I'd call « nuanced to the point of blandness ». So I very much doubt that it ever took a strong position on anything. (Other than that people ought not to be threatened by any sort of violence. Which, at least, has the virtue of being true.) Geronimus Prime (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2025 (UTC)Reply