I strongly agree with this.  By allowing nonsense like this to exist in the Wikipedia, it taints the entire project.

Zoe

 daniwo59@aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 1/7/2003 10:01:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, cunctator@kband.com writes:

On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 21:20, daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
>We now have an extensive and linked list of imaginary countries, including my
>personal favorite, "Purple Bunny" (I kid you not). Another link is to the
>Confederate Online States. Will we have an article for each state in the
>"confederacy" too? I think this is getting a tad excessive. Anyone else think
>so too?
>
My question is, so what? Wikipedia is not paper. If you think it's
excessive, then don't contribute to it.

The real problem is that most of the entries are being written in CIA
World Factbook style, not Wikipedia style.

I would like to think that we are trying to put together a serious encyclopedia. It has nothing to do with whether we are paper or not.