On 7/28/05, steve v vertigosteve@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Skyring skyring@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/28/05, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
Any crank can attach twenty spurious references
with no effort at all. But
that hardly makes citing one's sources problematic
in itself.
Odd you should mention this, David. One particular user attached ten spurious references in a VfD, none of which back him up. But he pretends they do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/De_fa...
Ah, Peter - that was a poke at Jdtrl! How sly.
He bends over, who am I to resist a poke?
But no, it's a poke at spurious arguments from any source. We all know the logical fallacies and the debating flaws, the argument ad homonym and so on. If an editor claims to be an expert and then offers up dodgy references in supposed support, I'm inclined to think the expertise lies more in the field of self-promotion than shining the light of knowledge upon Wikipedia.