Gotta love when Legit articles get deleted for no good reason

[brock]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?  There was nothing inaccurate in it!

[polluxlm]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?? There was nothing inaccurate in it!

You know why. It doesn't paint Axl in a good light.

[benchiefjr]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?  There was nothing inaccurate in it!

There was a time that the IRS wouldn't go to Madagascar to make a better man out of you, in turn giving you the blues in this world of a Chinese Democracy.

[bazgnr]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?? There was nothing inaccurate in it!

You know why. It doesn't paint Axl in a good light.

That, and the fact that it wasn't a new article.  Anything repeated usually isn't long for this board, either...

[bazgnr]

And, I might add, that's why I knew enough to copy and paste the article before it got deleted, so I could re-read it later... 

[chineseblues]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?  There was nothing inaccurate in it!

Are you talking about the New York Times article from last year?

[EFISH]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?  There was nothing inaccurate in it!

Are you talking about the New York Times article from last year?

Yeh, that's the one.

[chineseblues]

I don't blame them for deleting that thing, it was utter shite!

[EFISH]

I didn't even bother reading it..... I can't conentrate on something that long. 

[chineseblues]

I read it last year when it came out.. utter crap. I STILL can't believe the TIMES printed that garbage.

[polluxlm]

One of the most interesting GN'R articles I've ever read. Can't see how some think it was crap.

[EFISH]

Can someone PM me a link to it, I'll just try and read it later tonight. 

[SLCPUNK]

The making of CD was appreciated by almost all who read it, yet it gets deleted, WHY?  There was nothing inaccurate in it!

Are you talking about the New York Times article from last year?

That was a great article.

If they took it down it was only because it was already posted. I'm guessing their answer would be "use the search function."

[EFISH]

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/board/index.php?topic=19262.0

Time to start reading.

[KIKO2K6]

One of the most interesting GN'R articles I've ever read. Can't see how some think it was crap.

Agreed is a nice read.

[Voodoochild]

No, it's not a nice read. It's a piece of crap with bullshits, lies and bad journalism. I mean, it was like only picking some quotes from the guys banned here and state "HTGTH is really the hell".

Biased chose of interviews, biased words about Axl and, of course, failing to share the positive things: the 13 million is not only for one album, the songs are really good, etc. The article is not well written and, IMHO, just wants to spread lies and portrait the easy and wrong side of the truth behind this album. Sounds like they didn't got the answers from the gnr camp and had to only interview former employes from 1999.

The worst part is that people still believe in those lies.

[Mr. Nik™]

great Voodo!!

[Howard2k]

Jesus - some of you guys are pretty sensitive.

I don't think that as a group we need the "truth police" to tell us what parts to believe and what parts not to believe.   It's a great read and even if some of it is factually shaky ground that doesn't mean that it should be erased and the author burned at the stake.

Much of life is open to interpretation.   Don't be afraid to try to make that interpretation for YOURSELVES.  And don't be afraid to allow others that choice too. 

[bazgnr]

Jesus - some of you guys are pretty sensitive.

I don't think that as a group we need the "truth police" to tell us what parts to believe and what parts not to believe.? ?It's a great read and even if some of it is factually shaky ground that doesn't mean that it should be erased and the author burned at the stake.

Much of life is open to interpretation.? ?Don't be afraid to try to make that interpretation for YOURSELVES.? And don't be afraid to allow others that choice too.?

Great point.  To make that interpretation for ourselves, however, we first need access to the information.  In this case, also need to find that information for ourselves, rather then only process and discuss what is provided for us (or in this case, not deleted), yes?

[Howard2k]

Jesus - some of you guys are pretty sensitive.

I don't think that as a group we need the "truth police" to tell us what parts to believe and what parts not to believe.? ?It's a great read and even if some of it is factually shaky ground that doesn't mean that it should be erased and the author burned at the stake.

Much of life is open to interpretation.? ?Don't be afraid to try to make that interpretation for YOURSELVES.? And don't be afraid to allow others that choice too.?

Great point.? To make that interpretation for ourselves, however, we first need access to the information.? In this case, also need to find that information for ourselves, rather then only process and discuss what is provided for us (or in this case, not deleted), yes?

Absolutely.