Well, Tony & others will excuse me, but all i was trying to do was use his wording to try to expand on some possibilities. No harm or satire intended, just a way to get the discussion into what I thought might be some possible interesting directions.
eg. Notability solution: We should have an article if two independent established editors think we should? That would be enough to get rid of the real undoubted junk.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Chris Howie wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Charlotte Webb wrote:
On 3/11/08, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
Examine Tony's statement earlier in the thread: "I agree 100% If I can't convince anybody that something belongs in Wikipedia, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia." He doesnt say "convince everybody" Read literally, if any unbiased editor will support something, it should stay in, just as we don't ban a user if any one administrator is willing to unblock him.
it looks literally like the word "if", followed by the negation of "I can convince anybody" (which by itself boasts either that "I am able to convince [at least one person]" or that "I am able to convince [any person]"), but I could be off my meds...
We could just wait for Tony to reply with a clarification of his intended meaning instead of making guesses or assumptions that are going nowhere.
Certainly, but we also need to accept that the language speaks for itself, Alice in Wonderland notwithstanding.
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l