-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote:
Ultimately all
of our opinions are just one more point of view, and
every statement is probabilistic. The near sphericity of the earth is a
POV with a very high probability of truth. If all Wikipedians (and we
are many) hold that POV than the NPOV will also be in that range as a
consensus Why would it be necessary to add that qualification if
no-one is disputing the shape?
So, your answer to my question: "How many fundamentalists does it take to
make something controversial?" is "One. As long as she's a
Wikipedian."
Or am I reading you wrong? :)
Well, that does it for me. I'm going to stick {{unreferenced}},
{{NPOV}}, {{disputed}} and {{whatwereyousmokingwhenyouwrotethis}} on as
many articles as possible :)
Or start nominating some FAs for VFD as being uncyclopedic. Starting
with [[Xenu]]...
- --
Alphax | /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFC55uJ/RxM5Ph0xhMRAxtfAJ9IU7nSRmaQ6bX1WG7rALcUDx8jPgCaAuDG
EyysvZji12PkCBQGlnjfLSg=
=t6HI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----