" :::::::::::So your claim is that typographical errors are on a par with factual errors? Which makes it a factual error in the second piece to say that Gorman didn't point out factual errors in the first piece when he did the functional equivalent by pointing out typographical errors? Is this a general principle, do you think? A source with misspellings is prima facie unreliable? Also, do you have evidence for your characterization of O'Dwyer's as a ""small newsletter"" and all the other stuff you said? It seems to me that it's quite a weighty publication in its field, given the number of citations of it in scholarly articles and monographs, an issue which you still
" :::::::::::So your claim is that typographical errors are on a par with factual errors? Which makes it a factual error in the second piece to say that Gorman didn't point out factual errors in the first piece when he did the functional equivalent by pointing out typographical errors? Is this a general principle, do you think? A source with misspellings is prima facie unreliable? Also, do you have evidence for your characterization of O'Dwyer's as a ""small newsletter"" and all the other stuff you said? It seems to me that it's quite a weighty publication in its field, given the number of citations of it in scholarly articles and monographs, an issue which you still have