On 13/11/06, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.com wrote:
Angela stated for the record:
Wouldn't it make more sense to move every unsourced statement to the talk page or elsewhere and add them back when they're sourced? I don't see how having {{fact}} on almost every line is helpful to readers of the article.
It serves the purpose of warning our readers that a large fraction of that article is composed of [[Wikipedia:Complete bollocks]].
It's charmingly inept in concept, too. Huges swathes would be better characterised as "here is how local culture differs from an American norm", and the attempt to granularise on a country-by-country level leads us to get a lot of tedious cutting-and-pasting with bizzare gaps. Our reader can happily conclude that "fanny" is an entirely innocuous word in the UK, whilst asking unfamiliar women their age in .au or .nz is somehow much less offensive than elsewhere in l'anglophonie...
I really haven't much idea what can be done with that article to make it anything but a ragged group of half-reliable platitudes.